Replies to post #51551 on Expo Holdings Inc. (EXPH)

[zinn21]

"Certain" can or cannot mean all.

[Santa Barbara Broker]

If you can read, you read the word "speculation" several times in my posts. "Certain" does NOT preclude "all" when it is accompanied in context by the phrase "but not limited to". Read the linked story. It was put out by the CEO himself and no one even vaguely attempted to insinuate he was a "liar". I am not "new" to the company and I know exactly what is going on. I never once stated there was any formal R/S planned, only that a 100% transfer or any large percentage transfer of assets to the spin off would essentially produce the same effect as a R/S with the A/S shares retaining their original count and only the O/S being reduced in number. There is nothing "silly" about that at all. It is a simple fact.

You can't create wealth out of thin air by issuing pieces of paper. The EXPH shareholders aren't initially gaining anything of value on this spin off but a bunch of new shares. Assuming the market reacts in a normal fashion, 1 share of "etc" and 10 shares of EXPH will have no more value tomorrow than 10 shares of EXPH did today if they're reasonably valued using the same asset base. You seem to imply there is some sort of magic in all this. I made a very simple point, it is imperative that shareholders know what percentage of assets are being transferred from EXPH to "etc". If by some chance the vast majority or 100% of EXPH assets were transferred, they would be receiving "etc" shares but the total value of those shares added to EXPH shares would still only be 91% of what the personally held assets of EXPH shares were. With the remaining 9% of equity represented by the remaining 10.9M shares of "etc" held by the company in it's treasury. That would still represent shareholder equity but could be converted easily to cash and spent in whatever manner the Board of "exp" chose to. Which could turn it from shareholder equity to vapor in short order. This will not necessarily happen, and I never implied that it would. But it COULD happen and it is something shareholders need to be concerned with. Pretty simple theory and very simple math, I don't understand the hostility with it. IMHO.

SBB