InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

DRHUMI

12/22/23 7:55 PM

#192962 RE: bigtalan #192959

The lack of SAGA filings wasn't easy to lookup because there was no lack. The initial deal was signed April 17, one month before the first 10Q was due that they defaulted on. The continuing lack of filing combined with everything else is why I think CC only signed the contract for this year.

He can tell SAGA to pound sand on January 1.

If not, they have to fill out a brand new contract.
icon url

sspalmo

12/22/23 8:41 PM

#192968 RE: bigtalan #192959

Excellent summary of why we are that this share price. Hopefully a moderator will sticky this.
The only issue I have with it is this "So it might be hard to get 450M backing". In my opinion, the way this was initially being presented was that SAGA had the $450 million in funds. The way I see it now is that SAGA created 45 million shares and valued them at $10 each. I do agree that looking at this history of ENZC and SAGA and all involved that it will be even more difficult to get funding going forward. Someone new to this stock and not having read any of the actual filings might think that subsidiaries are valued at that amount just because SAGA said they were purchasing them for that amount. At this time the value of the subsidiaries and the intellectual property they contain is unknown.