InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

rwehapi2003

05/04/12 9:42 AM

#136698 RE: Mt bigsky #136697

I would assume the 250K/month is coming in now since the two conditions were met - the S1 is deemed effective, and 91 days since the Feb 2 closing date has passed.

Do we get a filing to show this or wait for the Q2 10-Q?
icon url

JackedOnCaffeine

05/04/12 9:46 AM

#136699 RE: Mt bigsky #136697

I believe the "certain stockholder" is the La Jolla investment group. I don't know why they can't just identify them directly. If that's the case, are we going to have to continue to endure a large holder of shares unloading them similar to what Brio and Hudson Bay have done? I need to revisit the funding agreement, but this seems to indicate they will have free trading shares and will be able to sell at will any shares they receive for providing additional funding.

The La Jolla financing is looking less and less attractive to me at this point. This is another reason I'm concerned that even if the company gets contracts, any increase in share price will be met with large scale selling and will limit the price increase or even drive it back down.
icon url

nilremerlin

05/05/12 1:28 AM

#136724 RE: Mt bigsky #136697

Mt bigsky: Page 40 of the prospectus names La Jolla as the selling stock/shareholder.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/919742/000114420412026166/v311969_424b3.htm

nilremerlin