Replies to post #25629 on Phoenix Associates Land Syndicate (fka PBLSQ)

[LowFloatGoat]

midas, given that becoming fully reporting was part of the deal, I am led to believe that shares must have been involved. If the lender didn't have shares then why would they care if PBLS was fully reporting?

My experience has been that when a loan involves shares the lender will short the stock to hedge the value of shares. At $.01 it would take 350 million shares to equal $3.5 million. It could be that the lender is covering their short position right now. Why would the share price fall when a short is covered? Well...if you subscribe to the theory that the share price is low because PBLS is buying shares back at the bid then you can see how short covering can have the same effect. The dealer places buy orders for hundredes of millions of shares at or below the bid to cover the short. The mm's take the price down to make money off the volume.

[seeclear]

'midas716'--- Yep, that's the kinda 'stuff' that may be dickin' around with current pps! Who ever it is they don't waste much time. It's either desperation or an agenda. But it is obvious/hopeful that this will inadvertently play very nicely into the buyback! If Paul did not have 'cash' this would have been a disaster! It's also comforting knowing , in a way Paul's best end result is also ours - 'A Higher pps' SC.

[fizzlegig]

midas716

Speculating, but I would say that the settlement was 23-117 million shares at either end of their respective best-case/worst-case spectrum. I derive that number from the debt settled on PR from Jan. 3 where the disputed claim was for 2.35 million dollars and settled with 557,000 cash and 11,824,000 restricted common shares. If you do the math, the shares were valued at .15 per share in the settlement.

So if we paid zero cash for the 3.5 million debt it would be over 23 million shares. Worst-case was nothing more that giving the PPS a value of .03 to come up with over 117 million shares. Reason for the big difference is that I believe we were trading around that area at the time before a run up to .06. It all starts to run together after a while, so I may be off a few pennies.

Keep in mind that is all without PBLS coming out of pocket with cash. Considering that the Jan. settlement was handled with restricted shares (we do not know how long), I would suspect the 3.5 million was handled much the same way.

Not just because the Jan. Settlement was handled that way, but because of the terms to become fully reporting. The terms indicate that PBLS is to start the process by 05/2006 and be fully reporting by 05/2007. If the shares were not restricted, why would those stipulations be in there for stock that the third party may not hold beyond that timeframe?

If it is restricted shares being dumped, it is probably from another deal. When everything become clearer, I would even speculate that the buybacks are close to when those previously restricted shares became tradable.

Even though our average volume is 15 million now, it was I think around 3-4 million a year ago and the company could have been trying to get cheaper shares from past deals because it would have been harder for large number of shares to be dumped than it is now. All speculation though.

Regards,
Fizzlegig