As I said previously, an "immediate" 8k is not required. The requirement is 4 business days. Also, they will not bust a 23 cent move on a 3.60 stock. Good luck.
The vol on Fri was about 3x the combined vol on Mon and Tue. That seems significant, tho maybe I am too optimistic. And why would you think any trades were canceled from Fri?
As an aside, keep in mind that under reg FD, the co has 4 business days to file an 8-K to disseminate material information. Assuming a material event happened on Fri that needs to be disclosed, they still have time to disclose.
Anyway, it is unfathomable how such a relatively simple deal, as these things go, could take so long, one way or the other. Good luck everyone.
If you had HOT pre spin, you should have gotten IILG, and retained your HOT. If you had HOT.WI, you should have just gotten the post spin HOT.
I had HOT.WI, and they mistakenly gave me IILG, which they took a away a few days later. It also took me several days for the HOT.WI to convert to HOT, leaving me with an illiquid cusip for several days.
It was definitely not handled well, at least from where I sit.
No offense, but what was worthwhile about that SA article other than to soothe nerves and pump the author's book? More "my sources" claiming WDC and Segate don't object to the deal. So, why is it taking so long? Also, citing an article that cannot be linked to, and using it as a straw man. Quoting things from the DMA that everyone already knows.
The only real point to consider in that article is the claim that reviews of this nature usually take this long. No, they simply do not for a deal of this nature, and the article does not offer or even speculate on a reason for the excessive time. It would have value if it offered insight on that matter, but it did not. It was just fluff, IMHO, and I am growing weary of people getting paid for pieces like that than do nothing but either misinform or gloss over key points and concerns while pumping one's book.
BTW, I do not believe it was a post in some obscure blog that can't be linked to that triggered the selling. Really, a blog that claims the outside date has passed when it has not is really going to be taken seriously by professional arbs? I don't think so. Maybe there was something else in there, but citing an article you can't quote is just bad journalism, I'm sorry.
In any case, I believe the decline was triggered by a company of the same name in Europe having their deal blocked and the bots reacting to that news feed. The reason I believe that is the dumping was coincident with that news feed, and, at least the service I use, mistakenly associated the symbol HTCH with some of those articles. I will note that the European co is spelled differently; I believe it is off by one letter, but if bots were reacting to the symbol, anything is possible. Note that this is just speculation; it may be completely and utterly wrong.
Sorry for the rant, but I grow weary of this deal, and some of the "professional" writing about it. Yes, I am long as well. Have a nice trading day.