I think the question/point being missed here is "h
Post# of 154604
(Total Views: 698)
Posted On: 05/06/2024 10:02:59 PM
I think the question/point being missed here is "has there been an offer rising to the point of being material information that the directors would have to disclose to the shareholders, whether they liked the offer or not."
By law, the directors have a duty to disclose any "material" information to shareholders, which is defined as information that a shareholder would want to know when making a decision to buy or sell. What is considered "material" is not exactly black and white, which can create potential problems for the directors, and has made it difficult at times for them to obtain professional insurance.
It is not a question of if "these guys are not going to sell out and are holding on for a more suitable partner" as that is subjective and while some here might be happy getting out of CYDY for $5/share and cutting their losses, others might not want to consider any offer that isn't at least twice that. But it isn't for the directors to make that decision, it is for the shareholders when a bonafide offer is actually made, and the directors have the tricky job of deciding when such an offer becomes material information.
Do we know everything? Of course not! But I find many here to be more emotional than pragmatic, perhaps because being so heavily invested, they fear losing it all, which could be devastating. On the other hand, if anything were to go the way we want it to, perhaps many here would be made rich.
It's been a long, arduous slog thus far, and personally, I think nothing changes materially unless and until there is a meaningful settlement received from Amarex that not only pays CYDY's debts, but puts cash in the coffers, but we could be many months from that. And even with Amarex money in the bank, CYDY is still only at the starting line without a partner, which is truly what is needed to move things forward. I think the directors would be thrilled to disclose any potential partnership, and if I was brokering the deal for the other side, I would suggest a partnership with a buyout potential built in.
We'll know when we know.
By law, the directors have a duty to disclose any "material" information to shareholders, which is defined as information that a shareholder would want to know when making a decision to buy or sell. What is considered "material" is not exactly black and white, which can create potential problems for the directors, and has made it difficult at times for them to obtain professional insurance.
It is not a question of if "these guys are not going to sell out and are holding on for a more suitable partner" as that is subjective and while some here might be happy getting out of CYDY for $5/share and cutting their losses, others might not want to consider any offer that isn't at least twice that. But it isn't for the directors to make that decision, it is for the shareholders when a bonafide offer is actually made, and the directors have the tricky job of deciding when such an offer becomes material information.
Do we know everything? Of course not! But I find many here to be more emotional than pragmatic, perhaps because being so heavily invested, they fear losing it all, which could be devastating. On the other hand, if anything were to go the way we want it to, perhaps many here would be made rich.
It's been a long, arduous slog thus far, and personally, I think nothing changes materially unless and until there is a meaningful settlement received from Amarex that not only pays CYDY's debts, but puts cash in the coffers, but we could be many months from that. And even with Amarex money in the bank, CYDY is still only at the starting line without a partner, which is truly what is needed to move things forward. I think the directors would be thrilled to disclose any potential partnership, and if I was brokering the deal for the other side, I would suggest a partnership with a buyout potential built in.
We'll know when we know.
(10)
(0)