Trump Media and Tech Group (NO Politics Allowed) (DJT)

[jbsliverer]

There is usage for SPACs, but there has to be tight rules governing them. For a bit there it was the wild west, every scammer and dirty grifter took advantage and printed boat loads of money for themselves just abusing the purpose. Leading to the biggest scam of them all, this one. They did get it toned down a bit in the number of SPACs churning out, saving billions of dollars of investors monies, not enough obviously with most egregious of grifters and scammers running this shtshow.

Haven't kept up with how it's totally turning out, but do see that it not going back to what it was in 2021. Not sure it matters, DWAC/DJT scam is grifting enough to make up for any of that. Posted some of this in a discussion a while back on another board;

.....Twenty or so years ago you'd have a ten year period with less than 20 SPACs, generally increasing over the years. In a five year period 2016-2020 there was around 400, then 2021 they starting printing them out like no tomorrow to over 600 for that year alone. Didn't matter what they were selling or what the fundamentals were, a convincing story and a pump job combined with some heavy manipulation and SPAC meme they will go with a big take for the sponsors.

2022 comes around and the SEC comes in proposes some new rules cracking down on all that, which they are still hashing out, but it did subdue the SPAC's down a bit. Less than a 100 in 2022 and pretty slow this year. Amongst a whole lot of other things SEC proposed enhanced and additional disclosures regarding a list of things including disclosures on conflicts of interest, dilution, and the SPAC sponsors themselves.

But the stickiest is the liability clauses. One of the main reasons for the shut down, the underwriters and banks put a moratorium on the SPAC money.
The SEC proposal if fully implemented, the de-SPAC target company would be deemed a co-registrant alongside the SPAC, thereby making it an issuer and its executive officers and directors subject to liability under US securities laws. Along with that the underwriters would carry potential liability with the sponsor or company making claims that usually are not realized.

Page 178 https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/proposed/2022/33-11048.pdf

In addition, these proposed amendments would necessarily have secondary impacts on the prospects or opportunities of private companies that would be potential targets of such newly organized SPACs if, as a result of their adoption, a different number or type of SPAC sponsors
and their affiliates participate in the market. Similarly, given that proposed Rule 140a clarifies the underwriter status of SPAC IPO underwriters at the de-SPAC transaction stage, this proposed rule may affect the number and type of potential targets that might be selected for acquisition by
potentially reducing the number of SPAC IPOs underwriters are willing to support or by potentially deterring SPAC IPO underwriters from directly or indirectly participating in the deSPAC transaction or any related financing transaction.
389 Other potentially affected parties include those parties who provide advisory or other services to sponsors of SPACs in connection with these registered offerings.

....not sure how watered down everything is going to end up, but I have seen a change in the filings and disclosures and the "carefulness" pushing out SPAC's. In time, we'll have to see what effects any rules will have, but I do believe we'll be in a better and/or different environment for the SPAC business. At least a slower one and maybe more focus on what they're selling and how they're selling......



Still believe that an orderly SPAC system can be used for some situations, only hope that the criminals grifting off of this one will get their comeuppance at some point, but have my doubts. Crime seems to pay in their world. All I can do is get my cut. Took my cut on the way up, taking my cut on the way down. A little slimy, but I'll get over it. lol



.