InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 546
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/10/2012

Re: xZx post# 18554

Tuesday, 10/30/2012 2:26:09 PM

Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:26:09 PM

Post# of 71458
Agree on all counts x

It'd surprise me if the split was Montecito's idea, but hey, post-split they can't complain that the pps is sub-penny or that their shares would have to be sold into an illquid market, so ya, could be.

The strategy for the capital change has yet to be revealed, but there IS an explanation for it and settling with Montecito (from Tony's post SH meeting comments) certainly appears to be the top priority now. I think you and I are both calling this Tony's "option b"

And then yes there's "option a"
Large $8.5M private placement to which Tony has already referred.

I'd say that on the surface "option a" seems better, although if Tony's debating both approaches they must somehow be more equivalent in benefit for his purposes.

Could also be a situation where the "best option" is the one the judge requires.

Could also be that Worthington is saying "hey, look, we're offering Montecito two options here. What more can they ask for?"

Not a bad way to present a final arguement towards a ruling if ya ask me.
Join InvestorsHub

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.