Does this promissory note come with no meaningful specified collateral ??
So are we to believe M & F obliged PURE's request to accept the so called promissory note for more than a million bucks with no meaningful collateral ?
Are warrants for shares in a company which has not reported an annual profit in a decade meaningful collateral ? No. If the company defaults the warrants are not going to be worth $ .83. The way I read the filing the note comes due and payable almost immediately if PURE defaults ..... so what does that mean to the note holder ? What [of value] can they try to attach if/when the OZ defaults ?
What does M & F get as security for their promissory note ? Last June when the OZ was scrounging around for someone to bail him out, at least those lenders were smart enough to get all the assets of the company pledged as collateral for their loan.
What [if anything] did M & F require as collateral for this so called promissory note ? Nothing ? They are a large law firm. Did they accept El Presidente's forward looking statements in lieu of collateral ? Is that the same as nothing ?
I'll believe there's no collateral agreement when I see it in print for public consumption.
They are in catbird seat to receive liquidation funds.
No collateral needed as it is in the LAW. Strange they
could of forced PURE into BK and sold off the assets
for what they are owed but chose to be NICE? IMHO
PURE is being prepackaged for Reorg and the lawyers
already have or know of a waiting buyer for the assets.
Maybe Rochon, maybe Krall himself under a new banner.
In any event the sale of more stock to pay 2M a quarter
in losses at this point is near useless IMHO as PURE
has reached the point of diminishing returns of stock sales.