Replies to post #58376 on Top Shelf Brands Holdings Corp. (DKTS)

[hedge_fun]

Let me try this. How did the settlement.....

make DKTS Rule 144 ineligible? And how does the ineligibility get restored?

What if the auditor concludes the debt notes were not valid?

What did the attorney tell you needed to be done and why?

Still trying to get my head around it. And I do understand that IF the brand(s) is moving then and DKTS owns 25%, then it isn't a shell. But wouldn't that mean it was a shell at the time of the settlement?

How did the settlement do what folks are claiming it did?

Thanks

[Bull2Bear99]

DKTS would not be trading at a 75% discount to ISBG, ISBG owns a 2nd brand Cavoda Vodka that DKTS doesn't own any part of..

[Carini]

"In addition, there was a basement provision put into the convertible notes which I'm told is significantly higher than the current stock price of DKTS.

Lol, like the 20-cent liquidation price in the ISBG share exchange deal?

Let me guess, the basement price for DKTS was around .0014, the "confirmed bottom"?

[Carini]

"it would have been ugly"

Would[/I] have?