Doesn't a reverse merger usually result in the ori
Post# of 96897
(Total Views: 743)
Posted On: 05/06/2017 8:02:44 PM
Doesn't a reverse merger usually result in the original shareholders of the public company only receiving a fraction of their ownership in the new private company taking over, sometimes by as low as a factor of 10%?
i.e. if you had 500,000 shares in NTEK you may only get 50,000 shares of SWIG?
I remember reverse mergers being discussed on this board many months ago of which it seemed to carry a negative connotation.
I'd love to be corrected if otherwise. I just know some of us have already been burned by the reverse split and am curious as to what the true details and outcome of a reverse merger would potentially entail if people seem to think that is one possible option on the table.
i.e. if you had 500,000 shares in NTEK you may only get 50,000 shares of SWIG?
I remember reverse mergers being discussed on this board many months ago of which it seemed to carry a negative connotation.
I'd love to be corrected if otherwise. I just know some of us have already been burned by the reverse split and am curious as to what the true details and outcome of a reverse merger would potentially entail if people seem to think that is one possible option on the table.
(0)
(0)