Again, common sense would dictate that this is the case, and I agree with you. Howeverm from the materials and statements that have been made publicly, one option the company can still pursue in the reverse merger is the one in which they purchse the shares for no less than the price stated in the original 8k announcing the merger. That price was $15.
It makes no sense to me why the SEC would allow a filing that makes that claim to go unchallenged, expecially after all this time, and it not be supported in some way.
From that point I can understand why Mr Harris would feel comfprtable makingthe statements he did regarding the "garaunteed" share price. Although lately he has not made those claims out of the context of the merger 8k verbiage.
If there is something out there that would prohibit him from doing so even though it has been reviewed and filed by the regulatory agency, then I, as an investor, would like to know about it.
Thank you for you courtesy in replying.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
