(Total Views: 346)
Posted On: 01/18/2021 11:53:37 AM
Post# of 60
Sometimes when you really analyze a stock, you come away with important observations/questions.
** I did just that this weekend and unpacked these:
1) Why would a guy like A. Wiley and/or D. Stitts agree to several deals that provide others with tens of millions of ATWT shares ?
2) Why would guys like Barton, Stevens, and Keys accept shares for partial payment IF they are Restricted and they felt Wiley/Stitts would dump millions in front of (ie: BEFORE) they could ? I mean Stu's 80M are Restricted for 1 year. His ability to "dump" / sell is locked for at least 11 more months.
3) Why would Wiley/Stitts at 68 and 64 elect to cause more dilution for themselves IF they desire to enhance their retirement and setup their families ? Isn't the proper answer because these deals will greatly enhance the bottom line which will moonshot PPS ? Could these other men have solid connections which would provide for Plan B and C buyers who are waiting in the wings ?
** I mean I realize logic is hard to apply to any pinky but isn't the theme clearly that they ALL have agreed to not trip over themselves here by dumping because they are going to be acquired soon for X amount ? I mean all shares would become Unrestricted upon a "change of control" and if say an acquisition for cash happens at a set PPS, then they will ALL be able to get the same price per share. I am just trying hard to think through WHY multiple businessmen (like the Stevens men) agreed to accept common shares as part (majority) in these acquisition deals? I mean if they thought Wiley and Stitts would dump theirs soon they would be essentially holding worthless shares as payment. WHO would ever agree to that - quite sure extensive DD was done by everybody. Don't forget that Stevens actually brought a lawsuit on Wiley (Atwec) back in 2013 and won a settlement of $116.2K. Now they get acquired for part cash and shares ?? Who makes a deal with folks that they once sued for monies due if they didn't do their DD in a detailed way ?
Thoughts ???
** I did just that this weekend and unpacked these:
1) Why would a guy like A. Wiley and/or D. Stitts agree to several deals that provide others with tens of millions of ATWT shares ?
2) Why would guys like Barton, Stevens, and Keys accept shares for partial payment IF they are Restricted and they felt Wiley/Stitts would dump millions in front of (ie: BEFORE) they could ? I mean Stu's 80M are Restricted for 1 year. His ability to "dump" / sell is locked for at least 11 more months.
3) Why would Wiley/Stitts at 68 and 64 elect to cause more dilution for themselves IF they desire to enhance their retirement and setup their families ? Isn't the proper answer because these deals will greatly enhance the bottom line which will moonshot PPS ? Could these other men have solid connections which would provide for Plan B and C buyers who are waiting in the wings ?
** I mean I realize logic is hard to apply to any pinky but isn't the theme clearly that they ALL have agreed to not trip over themselves here by dumping because they are going to be acquired soon for X amount ? I mean all shares would become Unrestricted upon a "change of control" and if say an acquisition for cash happens at a set PPS, then they will ALL be able to get the same price per share. I am just trying hard to think through WHY multiple businessmen (like the Stevens men) agreed to accept common shares as part (majority) in these acquisition deals? I mean if they thought Wiley and Stitts would dump theirs soon they would be essentially holding worthless shares as payment. WHO would ever agree to that - quite sure extensive DD was done by everybody. Don't forget that Stevens actually brought a lawsuit on Wiley (Atwec) back in 2013 and won a settlement of $116.2K. Now they get acquired for part cash and shares ?? Who makes a deal with folks that they once sued for monies due if they didn't do their DD in a detailed way ?
Thoughts ???
(1)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
