I will add that in hindsight maybe the SEC was correct in its concerns. NGLF sure didn't accomplish much to pull itself out of the blank check ranks...
And indeed if one goes through the list of shellholders on the S-1 registration, one sees that some of the names the SEC flagged are in fact persons who have been involved with other somewhat questionable dealings in other securities.
I should be clear that NONE of them has anything to do with IDLM other than perhaps holding shares!
When the SEC capitulated on the S-1, they handed these guys a windfall -- because their newly registered blank-check-all-but-in-name company was suddenly worth a lot more as a public shell that some private company could use to go public.
I think Ugly is correct when he guesses that someone acquired a large amount of these shares. They paid little enough for them ($54k or so per the form D) -- or a bit under 1c per share. So, if each gave/sold some to a wheeler-dealer to put together this deal, it was all gravy to them.
Did this cross any lines? Ummmmm. The shares were registered, so the S-1 guys were free to sell. And the wheeler-dealer probably never owned more than the threshold for reporting his holdings. I am not expert enough in securities law or the facts of this case to say what lines if any were crossed.
But the bottom line is that IMO this screwed up ownership picture explains why IDLM was selling for 20c rather than $1. And the lack of financials is why we've dipped even further.
Wadi
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
