|
|
Post by cgiscgis on Aug 27, 2016 14:35:16 GMT -5
That would give the company a huge runway to execute the entire pipeline.
|
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Aug 27, 2016 14:44:47 GMT -5
Are you being serious? If so, I need to go place a bag of popcorn in the microwave.
Would you please unfold this plan for us?
-How you'd convince shareholders to vote this into effect. Do you think they'd go along with it and why.
-Please mention what this would do to share count. How many we currently have at this moment, then how many we'd have at each juncture of your plan, etc.
-Why this seems like a good idea to you. Expound on it a little bit, if you would.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Aug 27, 2016 16:28:21 GMT -5
Let's walk through this. A 50-to-1 reverse split would take the number of shares outstanding down to a little under 10 million and the share price (initially, at least) to about $40. We'll assume that price sticks, so a $100 million offering would mean issuing about 2.5 million shares, increasing the number of shares by 25%. Practically speaking, such a huge dilution would reduce the value of shares, so more than 2.5 million would have to be sold to actually get $100 million. The RS really does nothing of value, since the same money could be raised with an equivalent dilution of the current share base at the current share price.
|
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Aug 27, 2016 16:56:04 GMT -5
I took it to mean 100 million share offering after the split. Like you said, the split is pointless otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by saxcmann on Aug 27, 2016 17:10:47 GMT -5
Zero chance...
|
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Aug 27, 2016 18:35:59 GMT -5
50 to 1 reverse split! OMG, mannmade would be down to about 250,000 shares if that were to happen. Liane, Sports and Spiro would be cut down to about 150,000. Not sure if any of them could sleep with such few shares. Shoot, I'd end up with a fraction of a share. But $40 a share sounds so great!
Oh, and Sophie, it was 100 million dollars, not shares.
|
|
|
|
Post by falconquest on Aug 27, 2016 19:23:54 GMT -5
Next topic....
|
|
|
|
Post by audiomr on Aug 28, 2016 16:10:43 GMT -5
I took it to mean 100 million share offering after the split. Like you said, the split is pointless otherwise. A 100-million share offering after a 50:1 reverse split would increase the number of shares outstanding by a factor of about 11, and of course, the share price would plummet from $40 to below $4. If you think you're underwater now .... I think he meant $100 million, not 100 million shares. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Aug 28, 2016 16:47:03 GMT -5
The real killer is that it would be impossible to do an offering anywhere near the post-split price. Investors would expect the stock to drop post split and would want that priced in, and a discount on the resulting price. You would end up with a trashed share price and a lot of dilution.
|
|
|
|
Post by afleischner on Aug 28, 2016 16:59:17 GMT -5
that would wipe out all of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We would never get our money back.
|
|
|
|
Post by sophie on Aug 28, 2016 17:04:02 GMT -5
I took it to mean 100 million share offering after the split. Like you said, the split is pointless otherwise. A 100-million share offering after a 50:1 reverse split would increase the number of shares outstanding by a factor of about 11, and of course, the share price would plummet from $40 to below $4. If you think you're underwater now .... I think he meant $100 million, not 100 million shares. After proposing a 50:1 reverse split, I didn't want to give too much credit  Looking at prior posts, it looks like cgis is just out to pour gas on fire. I was hoping he would unfold his great plan for us but I doubt he'll return. |
|
