It isn't a good deal for OSSG shareholders. It's also not a bad deal for OSSG shareholders.
I have been saying since the first day I came to this message board that there was a mistaken idea that buying OSSG in effect meant buying into the holding company.
That wasn't the case and never shoudl have been construed as such. It was simply wishful thinking. My point always was, "what would make you think ti was part?". I mean - why should that have ever been the case? That would mean that those who bought the original WKGT shres (at a higher price than the price OSSG was obtainable) would be effectively punished.
When OSSG was acquired, the promise to WKGT shareholders was dividend shares in a new holding company. That's what was promised to make it all "good". In the final implementation of that proimise, Stanton and some others forfeited their shares in WKGT to make that work in temrs of the final number of shares distributed. They got theirs in preferred and certianly other way that shouldn't be of concern to those who are to obtain a piece of the 5m.
These are the reasons why the $3.34 is not a valid number. It's the price of the apples (WKGT) shares not the oranges (OSSG).
There's no longer any question as to the misconstruing the relationship of contemporary OSSG shares to WKGT at this point. Stanton never mislead anyone as far as I can see.
I think part of the problems is really that the PR from WKGT days was not easy to obtain. It was tracking this process back to those days that reveals the facts to me.