(Total Views: 810)
Posted On: 02/04/2023 9:09:22 AM
Post# of 148870
I won't claim to know what the hell is going on with this deregistration of shares. Heck, I'm not even comfortable typing "deregistration". My brain says it should be unregistration, which my computer immediately informs me is incorrect.
But what I do know is you can google those filing numbers to see why they stick out from the hundred other filings over the last few years.
I did for the first three on the list, and they're all related to offerings for accredited investors. The third is streeterville (Fife).
When I took a glance at the last two they were aggregated data across multiple offerings, and scrolling down there were tables of investors and what they had before and after they sold, or exercised warrants, or whatever. I remember looking at these at the time out of curiosity about who would or wouldn't be on the list, along with who was holding and who was bailing.
Cytodyn is clearly stating with these new amendment filings that they're deregistering UNSOLD shares related to these offerings. This could mean 75 shares, or it could be millions. I just doubt it's a shit ton because Cytodyn has needed to fund operations without revenue year after year and it would be surprising if they were leaving tons of shares on the table every time they had an offering.
What I do know is that they aren't deregistering every last share associated with these offerings. Just the unsold shares. If you venture over to reddit or stocktwits you'll see numerous references to Cytodyn getting back almost 300 million shares (the total of all these filings) as if we've just reduced shares outstanding by that amount. Not a chance. Cytodyn almost certainly sold the majority of those shares to keep the lights on and the LL train moving. We'll drop by what is likely a miniscule, insubstantial amount.
So what does this all mean?
Well, I would highly doubt it's bankruptcy. Not only did they just raise some operating cash, but every time you see bankruptcy discussions you'll see "after declaring bankruptcy" because, if I'm not mistaken, you file for bankruptcy protection before you do anything else. You know, so you're protected. Cytodyn has not declared bankruptcy. Not to mention all the planning, additions to the scientific board, etc.
Also, why would they not do this for every last offering they've ever had? I've been invested for four years and I don't recall ever seeing an amendment like this filed. Why now, and why these specific offerings/filings?
Is it related to some sort of merger or acquisition?
I mean, I guess it's possible that they're cleaning up some of the books to make things right for a partner or suitor. But considering the number of shares coming back are likely insubstantial, what's the big whoop? Though I could get with an explanation that they're going to need every last share to offer to a partner as part of a deal to move an indication forward. Maybe that's all it is. They only have so many shares available to offer anyone looking to make an investment in our company as part of a partnership.
We also have a Nash trial they're anticipating starting soon, though that was lifted after the hold and after the rebranding, if I remember the last call correctly. I think Cyrus was listing things in order of how they'd go down. Hold lifted, rebranding, start a Nash trial.
So I'm leaning toward it having to do with either the hold or the rebranding.
Perhaps we can't have registered, but unused, shares of CYDY floating around when the name is changed to something snazzy like RESP or RSPT. Like, if the share is owned it transitions to the new name, but if it's registered and unowned it gets lost in the shuffle unless you deregister or offer them right quick.
You know, now that I type that out I'm thinking it's the reason. I have no historical data or precedence for believing this, just my gut. Which, if I'm being honest, has been wrong A LOT.
I don't see why a hold being lifted would make a lick of difference for these shares.
Yep, I think we've got it.
The bonus would be they wouldn't rebrand with the company on a hold.
So common sense says that the hold is lifted and this amendment allows the company to rebrand, name their CEO, launch a Nash trial, and maybe sign on a partner.
Or not.
But if it happens like I suggested I'll expect each of you to praise my intelligence and problem solving skills. Otherwise, let the below "IMO" stand as a get out of jail free card if I'm way the hell off.
Oh, and the second most likely scenario is they need these shares to offer to a partnership. I get points for that if it happens too. #Points
All of this is IMO, of course.
But what I do know is you can google those filing numbers to see why they stick out from the hundred other filings over the last few years.
I did for the first three on the list, and they're all related to offerings for accredited investors. The third is streeterville (Fife).
When I took a glance at the last two they were aggregated data across multiple offerings, and scrolling down there were tables of investors and what they had before and after they sold, or exercised warrants, or whatever. I remember looking at these at the time out of curiosity about who would or wouldn't be on the list, along with who was holding and who was bailing.
Cytodyn is clearly stating with these new amendment filings that they're deregistering UNSOLD shares related to these offerings. This could mean 75 shares, or it could be millions. I just doubt it's a shit ton because Cytodyn has needed to fund operations without revenue year after year and it would be surprising if they were leaving tons of shares on the table every time they had an offering.
What I do know is that they aren't deregistering every last share associated with these offerings. Just the unsold shares. If you venture over to reddit or stocktwits you'll see numerous references to Cytodyn getting back almost 300 million shares (the total of all these filings) as if we've just reduced shares outstanding by that amount. Not a chance. Cytodyn almost certainly sold the majority of those shares to keep the lights on and the LL train moving. We'll drop by what is likely a miniscule, insubstantial amount.
So what does this all mean?
Well, I would highly doubt it's bankruptcy. Not only did they just raise some operating cash, but every time you see bankruptcy discussions you'll see "after declaring bankruptcy" because, if I'm not mistaken, you file for bankruptcy protection before you do anything else. You know, so you're protected. Cytodyn has not declared bankruptcy. Not to mention all the planning, additions to the scientific board, etc.
Also, why would they not do this for every last offering they've ever had? I've been invested for four years and I don't recall ever seeing an amendment like this filed. Why now, and why these specific offerings/filings?
Is it related to some sort of merger or acquisition?
I mean, I guess it's possible that they're cleaning up some of the books to make things right for a partner or suitor. But considering the number of shares coming back are likely insubstantial, what's the big whoop? Though I could get with an explanation that they're going to need every last share to offer to a partner as part of a deal to move an indication forward. Maybe that's all it is. They only have so many shares available to offer anyone looking to make an investment in our company as part of a partnership.
We also have a Nash trial they're anticipating starting soon, though that was lifted after the hold and after the rebranding, if I remember the last call correctly. I think Cyrus was listing things in order of how they'd go down. Hold lifted, rebranding, start a Nash trial.
So I'm leaning toward it having to do with either the hold or the rebranding.
Perhaps we can't have registered, but unused, shares of CYDY floating around when the name is changed to something snazzy like RESP or RSPT. Like, if the share is owned it transitions to the new name, but if it's registered and unowned it gets lost in the shuffle unless you deregister or offer them right quick.
You know, now that I type that out I'm thinking it's the reason. I have no historical data or precedence for believing this, just my gut. Which, if I'm being honest, has been wrong A LOT.
I don't see why a hold being lifted would make a lick of difference for these shares.
Yep, I think we've got it.
The bonus would be they wouldn't rebrand with the company on a hold.
So common sense says that the hold is lifted and this amendment allows the company to rebrand, name their CEO, launch a Nash trial, and maybe sign on a partner.
Or not.
But if it happens like I suggested I'll expect each of you to praise my intelligence and problem solving skills. Otherwise, let the below "IMO" stand as a get out of jail free card if I'm way the hell off.
Oh, and the second most likely scenario is they need these shares to offer to a partnership. I get points for that if it happens too. #Points
All of this is IMO, of course.
(23)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
