Replies to post #28931 on Newlead Holdings Ltd. (fka NEWLF)

[sidedraft]

Good info here also:

*8
And Ironridge is responsible for only a small portionof NewLead's share dilution. Between April 11 and June 6,NewLead issued nearly 69 million shares, only 8 million of which went to Ironridge. O'Neil Decl. ¶ 68. Since April, twoother shareholders received and sold more than five timesas much NewLead stock as Ironridge, O'Neil Decl. ¶ 67.Between the issuance of the restraining order on June 3 andthe evidentiary hearing on June 9, NewLead issued over 34million shares to other parties, nearly doubling the numberof outstanding shares. NewLead will continue to hemorrhagecommon shares and dilute their value regardless of whetherIronridge is enjoined

http://www.scribd.com/doc/230134253/NewLead-Holdings-Ltd-v-Ironridge-Global-IV-Ltd

[Dragenn]

ALSOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! This is also from the transcript. Probably why the charge for damages is so high. This story just gets weirder. THe more l dig in.

June 9, 2014 Tr. 157:24–158:13.
Even if NewLead is correct that the cash is not yet due and
Ironridge would be acting wrongfully, NewLead could tender
the cash now and assert a claim for damages in the arbitration,
making this a dispute over money and therefore inappropriate
for equitable relief.

[GaryJPalys]

And what did it say before that? Maybe people should read the whole transcript to get a better understanding of what type of lowlife people are involved in $NEWL

And just for the record, $NEWL has never traded at $146.50 a share! On March 13, 2014 it closed at $2.93! $NEWL is trying to confuse the issue by giving quotes that showed on the charts after several reverse splits! Here is the chart unadjusted for the reverse splits! http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=_NEWL&p=D&yr=0&mn=6&dy=0&id=p86792153524

Anyway, onto the transcript, I suggest everyone read it in it's entirety!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/230134253/NewLead-Holdings-Ltd-v-Ironridge-Global-IV-Ltd

NewLead argued Ironridge “has artificially driven down theprice of NewLead's Common Shares from $146.50 per share(March 13, 2014) to $0.3899 per share (May 15, 2014)in only two months.”Bertsos Decl. ¶ 11. But Ironridge'sfirst NewLead transaction was on April 14, 2014, onemonth after the alleged manipulation began. NewLead's CFOconceded Ironridge could not be responsible for any declinein NewLead's stock price before April 14. Tune 9, 2014 Tr.72:8–73:6. NewLead's share price has declined precipitouslyover a period of years. Indeed, in the twelve months priorlo April 14, 2014, NewLead's share price dropped from$9,900 to $17. O'Neil Decl. ¶ 71. Adjusting for stock splits,NewLead's share price fell from $3.6 million in 2006. June9, 2014 Tr. 71:6–14. Ironridge had nothing to do with any of those declines.

And Ironridge is responsible for only a small portionof NewLead's share dilution. Between April 11 and June 6,NewLead issued nearly 69 million shares, only 8 million of which went to Ironridge. O'Neil Decl. ¶ 68. Since April, twoother shareholders received and sold more than five timesas much NewLead stock as Ironridge, O'Neil Decl. ¶ 67.Between the issuance of the restraining order on June 3 andthe evidentiary hearing on June 9, NewLead issued over 34million shares to other parties, nearly doubling the numberof outstanding shares. NewLead will continue to hemorrhagecommon shares and dilute their value regardless of whetherIronridge is enjoined.