Replies to post #7826 on RVUE Holdings Inc. (fka RVUE)

[nosfelle]

never are the tax reduction incentives as great as the capital lost

imo roche has built a bridge, with his loan, just long enough to arrive at a sale event somewhere between december and march

rvue

[ChuckBits]

My brain hurts. The first sentence in the default clause is a mile long. I keep reading it trying to see if there is some kind of circular logic or something I'm missing but I think it's just over my head?

I also keep going back & forth between "wow, never thought of that one" & "duh, that should have been more obvious". I've even contemplated could RVUE be ready to announce a "positive event" that satisfies the $200k or "right after" Roche gets his 2.5 more shares?

I "can't see" how liquidating assets would benefit Roche? I'm assuming that even if RVUE has something worth "much more" than what's on the balance sheet, it's not like he could sell it for more than the debt due & then pocket the extra, right?

I think he wants more shares and he would only want more shares if he thinks he can make more money with them which would mean we would too.

Looking forward to whatever the answer is!

[ChuckBits]

Another thought process to consider:

Pacchini has basically been working for minimum wage when you consider his background. His latest employment contract was written August 2015. He only gets "paid" if RVUE achieves revenues substantially higher than what they are now, OR, if there is a "sale of the company / change of control".

There appears to be a "bigger bonus" in the form of stock and/or stock options, lot's of 'em. The exercise of the options appears to be .04 cents.

Would Pacchini be hanging around for worthless RVUE stock? The contract has some conditions related to the "sale of assets" too but unfortunately I don't fully understand it?