InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,841.15
(
0.57%
)
US TECH 100
19,893.40
(
0.41%
)
Dow Jones
42,441.33
(
0.78%
)
Brent Oil
71.55
(
-1.53%
)
Bitcoin
68,838.22
(
1.35%
)
Post# of 74539
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

The_Pink_Lawyer

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 1167
Posts 31362
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 08/08/2005

The_Pink_Lawyer

Re: kayakzz post# 18238

Wednesday, 05/08/2013 5:17:57 PM

Wednesday, May 08, 2013 5:17:57 PM

Post# of 74539
kayakzz, to your question, I believe the answer is "no" because the restrictions attach to the shares, i.e., if Frankel transfers restricted shares for "consultation services" those remain restricted. It is only if the shares are free-trading and unrestricted pursuant to: (1) an S-1 Filing declared "EFFECTIVE" by the SEC; or (2) an exemption to the S-1 Filing in Rule 144, and subsequently transferred would such shares be free-trading. This is my understanding.

So, could Frankel Spankel pay his golf buddy, mistress, college room mate or bartender shares of stock for "consultation services", which they then sell to the shareholders?

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/board.aspx?board_id=7516

Make your investment/trading decisions on your own; do not rely on The_Pink_Lawyer or 10Baggas

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next
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.

Sign Up