Marc - you have hit on the crux of (one) of the ma
Post# of 155179
(Total Views: 535)
Posted On: 09/29/2021 10:43:50 PM
Marc - you have hit on the crux of (one) of the many disagreements around here:
Yes, anyone who really understood the notes knew that the $10 conversion price was very, very unlikely to come in to play. Rosenbaum certainly should have known that. But, it is also true, that NP was repeatedly saying (or strongly implying) that he was raising money at $10. And at one point, he said these loans were from "two new, very sharp wall street people", when they were all from Fife all along. Just weird and misleading. For me, it is disqualifying. For many others, it is not.
And, it isn't accurate to say that the terms never changed. All the "note partitioning" to repay chunks at then current prices was new and not contemplated in the beginning. There have been other changes.
All that said, these notes are/were not the worst deals ever. We needed the money and this was our best shot, AFTER we decided not to issue stock to the public at $3, $ or $5 when we had a chance. This is where NP made a bad decision. It is really pretty simple.
Finally, the extra settlement on the one note was egregious and has never been fully explained. It is true that we ended up paying more than $20 million in value on one of the $5 million notes due to some "dispute" that hasn't been explained.
Yes, anyone who really understood the notes knew that the $10 conversion price was very, very unlikely to come in to play. Rosenbaum certainly should have known that. But, it is also true, that NP was repeatedly saying (or strongly implying) that he was raising money at $10. And at one point, he said these loans were from "two new, very sharp wall street people", when they were all from Fife all along. Just weird and misleading. For me, it is disqualifying. For many others, it is not.
And, it isn't accurate to say that the terms never changed. All the "note partitioning" to repay chunks at then current prices was new and not contemplated in the beginning. There have been other changes.
All that said, these notes are/were not the worst deals ever. We needed the money and this was our best shot, AFTER we decided not to issue stock to the public at $3, $ or $5 when we had a chance. This is where NP made a bad decision. It is really pretty simple.
Finally, the extra settlement on the one note was egregious and has never been fully explained. It is true that we ended up paying more than $20 million in value on one of the $5 million notes due to some "dispute" that hasn't been explained.
(6)
(2)