InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 1
Posts 108
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/12/2011

Re: Emilez post# 7528

Friday, 11/25/2011 3:28:44 AM

Friday, November 25, 2011 3:28:44 AM

Post# of 163716
No I don't think shares will be issued at all to Ironridge. Why go through that whole process just to default? If they were going to do that then they could have just issued shares straight at 1.50 like before. The biggest loser in any share dilution is the largest owner, who happens to be the CEO, who also pays his salary half cash/half shares(360k/360k).

The Ironridge possibility of recieving shares is their security blanket and they made it a sweet deal to prevent a default which is how every single deal set up like this. It's like taking a loan against collateral, which happens to be shares in this case. If they were priced at 1.50 instead of .41 I say sure go ahead and default which is exactly the reason why they are priced at .41, to provide incentive to not default.

Solomon talked about retiring shares because previously the company formally disclosed their intention in a CC that they would. So the company is just following through with what they previously stated. If memory serves right, the retirement was to be before the end of the fiscal year and the amount of shares to be retired was 2 million.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.