InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

loanranger

08/09/18 9:17 AM

#41462 RE: chemist72 #41460

Interesting questions.
The lack of current filings wouldn't stop him but the terms of the Note might....it's not unusual for there to be a prohibition included. I can't look right now.

VERY good question, given that it's not an unusual practice at all for toxic lenders.
icon url

penknee

08/09/18 9:30 AM

#41463 RE: chemist72 #41460

He would only short to drive the price down, lowering his conversion price and most likely covering on the open market, that’s what I’ve seen in the past. I didn’t see any language in the note that says he will be doing that, I could be wrong, and a lot of the note is missing. I’ve seen it in other stocks with convertible debt, I believe HMNY, has a lender that does that, and DRYS did in the past, it crushes the company a lot quicker compared to a typical death spiral. That doesn’t mean he’s hasn’t done that with SIGO, but short interest has been low.

He should make out well on this deal, if SIGO doesn’t do what it takes to get him free trading shares, he can go to court and get a 3(a) exemption. Essentially if the judge rules in favor of Fife the shares will be free trading, and the note spells out the penalties, I believe the shares will convert at an 80% discount, plus Fife’s attorneys fees.