If you continue reading the quote you started, you
Post# of 22454
Quote:
Pasaca will also have the right to appoint three members to the Company’s Board of Directors. Both the first and second closing are subject to numerous contingencies, as set forth in the Purchase Agreement.
The Purchase Agreement says this about directors:
Quote:
(m) Directors. (i) On the initial Closing Date, the Company shall expand the Board of Directors of the Company to five (5) directors. Concurrently therewith, the Investors will nominate three (3) persons to be appointed to and serve on the Board of Directors. Upon such nomination, the incumbent members of the Board of Directors (who shall remain on the Board of Directors) shall appoint each such nominee to fill each of three newly created vacancies, and, if there shall be any other vacancies, the Board of Directors shall appoint up to two (2) persons to serve as directors for the two remaining seats (the “Incumbent Directors”).
According the Nevada's business portal, that hasn't happened. QMC is also in default in NV. Seems strange that Pasaca would allow that if they were involved, no?
And what about those contingencies... one is:
Quote:
Neither the Company nor any of its Subsidiaries shall take any action which would be reasonably expected to result in the suspension or termination of trading of the Common Stock on any market.
Oops.