Whoever would get the benefits of the $981K potential maximum capital expenditure that could be created from current shareholder equity assuming 1) a 100% asset transfer from EXPH to "etc" and 2) "etc"'s remaining 10.1M A/S shares retaining private placement value at approximately .09 cents following a 100% transfer of assets. JD would certainly control how that nearly one million in cash would be spent. Now I am assuming this "private entity" while promising to be more transparent than EXPH in their filings and such, will not be trading stock on a public exchange? That is the way it seemed to read. However if "etc" shares can be publically traded, that leaves them open to be sold as debentures in fairly large, discounted chunks. Meaning management could dispose of those 10.1 million shares in no time flat, transferring them to cash quickly. Meaning when this was finally discovered in one of those filings, it could mean further declines in shareholder value through dilution depending on how that money ended up being spent. Right now shareholders have received assurances that none of this will ever happen. But it could, which is why I am now questioning the motives behind the whole deal very carefully.
This is why it is essential to determine the exact, planned percentage of asset transfer, insist on there being a cap amendment written limiting it to a certain percentage included in the charters of BOTH companies and, following the failure of the CEO to agree to that, DEFEATING under any legal means necessary, the proposal to spin off "etc" at the shareholder meeting. IMHO.
SBB
