% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.


you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • monte.core monte.core Apr 2, 2010 12:43 PM Flag

    Your Interpitation

    Those management guys aren't dummies. Correct me if I'm wrong, but back when the dilution was issued there was discussion that the amount of the offering equaled the amount of outstanding debt ($6.5M?), so the surmisal of some people on the board then was that the intended effect of the offering was to wipe out the debt (thereby making acquisition that much easier/more attractive to suitors).

    This is coming out of my morning haze, sorry I don't have links to back any of that up, but wanted to throw that out there in case anyone else recalled the same thing and if that made sense. What is their debt situation right now?

    If someone can smack me factually about that please do, this conversation just reminded me of that back when the offering came out.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Correct me if I'm wrong, but back when the dilution was issued there was discussion that the amount of the offering equaled the amount of outstanding debt ($6.5M?),

      Monte. That sounds reasonable. As I read your words it jogs a little thought that hasn't been in my feeble mind. They have that shelf to go to. The people that bought in at that time was who? TWP? That maybe a hint of what was going on. Because they are publicly traded there's a lot of required hurdles to get over and legally they must disclose anything that could financially effect shareholders.

      Had the sale or a proximily of one already occured? Was the announcement date delayed so that the acquirer could short this down as part of their reward? Is that 6.4 payment to TWP as they sell their investment payment combo into a lifted PPS when the Sale is announced? Is the Leroy Swindle downgrade part of that? Lots of smoke and mirrors with almost complete silence from the company media machine is saying something. If they wanted out they'd be hyping and selling? So far they've held tight. They must report in 48 Hours upon purchase or sale I think. % maybe a part of that restriction or disclosure law.

      • 2 Replies to snobordnutt
      • Hi Mr.Snob..i agree..i've had these exact thoughts for some time now and voiced them here consistently..yes it is somehat dubious form a legal context but everything makes sense if you assume a t/over deal had already de-facto been agreed....the rest has just been paying the piper.If so, we may still have a bit more turbulence to contend with til the pilot lands this prediction has not changed ...t/over to be announced at a figure which gives sufficient compensation to all the insiders who bought in at mid £2's....(and allows those warrants to kick in too to the newbies)...has got to be at least a double for them so we must be north of $5 imho. I wish i had both the strength of my convictions and the spare $ to buy uba-aggressively at these levels !

      • hi snob and boris, getting back to the resignation of the president, if what the two of you are saying is to be correct, the president was actually pushed away correct? couple questions... what are his options to exercise his shares? do the VC's make decisions on executives coming and going? can he still be linked to hlcs as part of an acquiring co?
        in addition, hlcs management may not be calling all the shots at this point, correct... not if an acquirer has been behind the scenes? am i correct?
        plain and simple... give me a honest percent regarding this next question...
        1. what are the chances that hlcs is in talks with no one, had miserable numbers and accounting issues? from both of your experiences, you collectively believe this is for sale, etc... than why hasnt more retail/instits bought in???
        snob, boris bb, monte, anyone???