Replies to post #26935 on Newlead Holdings Ltd. (fka NEWLF)

[janice shell]

1manband Member Level
Tuesday, 07/22/14 06:47:28 PM
Re: janice shell post# 72985
Post # of 72995

There are several NASDAQ rules under which a Company could be immediately delisted. This sounds like it falls under Section 5100. The existence of the onerous toxic convertibles created a public interest concern, which led to the suspension and delisting. Such a deficiency would not require a specified cure or compliance period. Once the determination is made, they are gone.

The bigger question is - why and how did NASDAQ allow it to come to this in the first place? They usually do not allow toxic death spiral convertibles. They only allow them in special cases. So what was so special about this company?

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=104558352


janice shell Member Level
Tuesday, 07/22/14 06:48:35 PM
Re: 1manband post# 72986
Post # of 72995

They did cite a public interest concern about the company and the stock at the end of June.

Don't know. At first, they seem to have had more normal financing arrangements. The creditors agreed to restructure, but after a few rounds of that I suppose it became evident that the problems had not been resolved. They defaulted on everything.

As of 8 May, things were not looking good:

As of December 31, 2013, our outstanding indebtedness was $234.6 million. Despite our restructuring efforts, as of May 8, 2014, we continue to have a substantial amount of indebtedness amounting to approximately $159.9 million, excluding the BCF of the 7% Notes (excluding the share settled debt and redeemable preference shares with Ironridge Global IV, Ltd).

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1322587/000114420414029091/v375861_20f.htm

Our high level of indebtedness could have important consequences to our shareholders.

Unfortunately it seems some paid no attention to that.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=104558372


1manband Member Level
Tuesday, 07/22/14 06:54:32 PM
Re: janice shell post# 72987
Post # of 72995

That would explain a lot. That would be the notification that NASDAQ was going to suspend and delist them.

Sure enough, it was detailed in this 6-K:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1322587/000114420414040066/v382669_6k.htm

They were required to request a hearing from NASDAQ by July 7. It doubt it is a coincidence that they filed a lawsuit against Ironridge on.......July 7. The had no defense against the delisting, so I am sure they hoped the lawsuit would somehow convince NASDAQ to not delist them while the lawsuit made its way through the courts.

No dice.

I am not at all surprised that NASDAQ suspended them when they did. The June 25 notification and filing of the 6-K should have been ample warning to investors what was coming. Investors have no excuse for being caught - they had weeks of warning.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=104558478