Replies to post #30258 on Hangover Joe's Holding Corp. (fka HJOE)

[samsamsamiam]

WOW! Please tell me you are joking!!'
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if these idiots actually believed a scenario so twisted.

I believe matt veal has worked for a couple other revoked stocks before so perhaps he doesn't mind taking the risk of getting revoked by the SEC.

Tuesday, 06/23/15 08:13:08 AM
Re: sunspotter post# 30255
Post # of 30260
That is an interesting conundrum you have netered into with your argument. Do you understand what fiduciary means? IF they were delaying the filing (or just not being overly aggressive in dealing with the auditor situation) to prevent conversions from taking place - who does that benefit...? It certainly WOULD benefit the company AND more importantly the shareholders. Isnt that their most basic role as fiduciaries? If the argument is those conversions were going to once again wipe out shareholder value through aggressive shorting (most of it naked) - wouldn't the SEC have to nod to protecting the shareholders - especially when their auditor was suspended BY the SEC? SO - in acting as fiduciaries in this situation - they would be acting morally as well.

Now - the legal component is a little stickier. Again - it is up to the SEC to enforce the R&R but they are in place to PROTECT the outside shareholders FROM these very tactics. In civil court - the financiers can only argue damages by NOT being able to cover their short positions - how is that a damage of the original loan agreement? It is a perversion of the agreement. If the company pays off the loan amounts per the terms - the financiers cant justly argue damages for the perversions. If they want to argue penalties - that is a different story. However, with a suspended auditor and the financiers having made a sizeable return already on the original loan agreement - how sympathetic will a judge/jury be to further compensation?

[sunspotter]

"It certainly WOULD benefit the company AND more importantly the shareholders."

I'm afraid that in the universe I inhabit, wilfully ignoring the legal requirements that one willingly and knowingly accepts when appointed as a company officer is never a good thing.

And putting the shareholders in jeopardy of an SEC suspension is also considered a bad thing where I come from.

[jdkarns1965]

Those loan sharks deserve to get spanked.

[janice shell]

In civil court - the financiers can only argue damages by NOT being able to cover their short positions - how is that a damage of the original loan agreement?

What short positions? The toxic funders loan the company money. In return, they get convertible notes. When the holding period has expired, they convert those notes into free trading stock and sell that stock.

One of the conditions of their financing agreements is that the company remain current with its filing obligations. HJOE has failed to do that, and so has breached the contracts.