So very true, but I think he could have bought a cleaner shell for less money. This is the very reason I tabled the idea of acquiring the shell myself.
However, in this scenario I think CEO would get better ROI sooner by merely doing something pawcula would not - settling with the litigants and pawcula victims. This should have been assumed as a liability to be addressed when new guy bought the shell. It's all part of the 'rehab' of CBAY.
Do all that for a shell? I don't know what a clean pink shell cost so I can't argue about the price. However if he intentionally "wipes out all current classes of stock", wouldn't that kill his credibility? Who would buy any new shares from him, knowing that he did this? Why bother to get a new T/A if he's going to have those shares expire? I could see that move done after the current shares expire. Wouldn't it be better to do an R/S like most do? That way you may have angry share holders, but at least they still get something back.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
