Oh, I'm not the least bit confused by robshecrazy. I realized from the very beginning that he's bat #$%$ crazy. I've been through these deferred ex-date dividends many, many times and always have a lot of fun watching close-minded nut bags try to tell me I'm wrong about how they work. After doing this for years, I gotta hand it to robshecrazy - he's the looniest of them all!
Well, let's say it's trading at 6.69, where it traded at most of the day, today, the 11th, until near the close. But two sentences ago you said you sold it after the tenth and also sold your right to the dividend to the buyer of your AWRE shares. So how can you sell your shares, including the right to the dividend, and yet the right to the dividend not belong to the buyer of your shares?
"Yes you can still receive the dividend after JUly 10th"
Oh, good - you changed your mind back to what you said in the first place.
"but be prepared to shed more money example if you go to your broker now you will see siome people putting in there premium price now good to cancel."
Who cares what high price some shareholders put a sell order in for when plenty of others are still willing to sell for 6.69?
"To understand this better look at the bid price in blue those are people whop own the stock before July 11th and are getting the dividend. There price will be higher then market value so if you go to buy the stock dirt"
What is stock dirt?
...robshemanski? Stock dirt?
"In order to understand how stocks special dividend works you must understand what terminology means."
"What is a record date mean? It means that you must own the stock by this date. It's the last day to own the stock which is today July 10th."
So, the ex-date means nothing?
"From July 11th to July 23rd you can still get the dividend but have to pay a higher premium"
But you just said that July 10th was the last day to own the stock in order to receive the dividend. How can you still get the dividend just by paying a premium if the 10th was the last day to qualify?
"say I was going to sell my shares that I own you would have to pay more money I may ask for 7.50 a share"
Really? Then how come it traded only two cents higher during most of the trading day on the 11th? Is $6.69 just about the same as $7.50?
"I own 6800 shares of AWRE Say I decide to sell some of it before the dividend date is reached. I will not sell it at market value but at a higher premium."
How much higher?
"I bought it at 6.58 so I would sell it at 8.34."
Oh. ... But how can you sell it for 8.34 after the 10th when it's already after the 10th and it traded all day below 6.75?
"I want my 1.75 dividend a share so in order for you to get you have to pay a higher premium."
But why would I buy from you when everybody else is willing to sell it below 6.75? 63,000 shares below 6.75 today alone.
"Say you bought it from me I just gave up my right to own the dividend and then you get the right to the dividend."
Okay. You sold and gave up the right to the dividend. It now belongs to the buyer.
"If you buy at market value saying it's trading at 6.58 after July 10th you are not owning the stock by the record date therefore you do not qualify for the dividend."
This is so educational I'll have to continue it in the next post ...
You wouldn't happen to mean cwn600, would you?
"You are confused"
I am, am I? Let's see ...
"the owners of 499 shares or less of NAT are getting in cash, they are in fact getting cash based on the NAO closing price of 8/11/2014"
I never said they weren't.
"Owners of more are getting NAO shares based on the IPO price of 15."
Originally based on the the IPO price of $15, yes, but the actual value of those shares when distributed will be based on the closing price of NAO on August 8, which is what I originally said, though I didn't have a specific date because it wasn't announced until today.
"the entire point of my post and this exercise was to show fellow NAT shareholders that we are getting NAO shares at a market discount"
But you're NOT getting the NAO shares at a market discount. In January, when the distribution was announced, NAT already owned the NAO shares that they will be distributing. That means YOU already owned your proportional share of NAO through your ownership of NAT, and the price of NAT already reflected the ownership of the NAO shares. As the trading price of NAO has increased, so has the value of the NAO shares held by NAT. So on the day the NAO shares are spun off, you'll have two securities, NAT and NAO, that together represent the value that NAT alone represented the day before the spinoff. You're getting nothing at a discount. You're simply getting the increased value of the NAO shares that were a part of your NAT ownership in the first place. No different than any other stock you might own that goes up.
"Do you understand now?"
That's my question to you.
"I know what you're saying I just don't agree with you period"
What you can't get through your thick skull is that I have not been stating my opinion or anyone else's. I have simply been explaining the stock exchange rules for this spinoff. I've repeatedly pointed people to google searches where they can read the rules for themselves, but they don't, so while I don't think I'm any kind of wiz, I do realize you are definitly stupid.
What's your excuse for not reading the rules for yourself?
Plain ol' stupid.
"we will see who's Right"
Yes, we will, and since the stock exchange rules require the distribution to be handled the way I've described, it will play out exactly that way. But you won't be here to admit you're wrong. Blockheads never do.
"Read the thread"
Yes, by all means read it. And if it's not too much trouble, try comprehending it at the same time.
"you jumped in saying it's a close of trading price which was dead wrong"
If my stating the value of the distribution would be based on a close-of-trading price, then why does NAT's press release this morning say the exact same thing?
From this morning's press release: "The cash value of the dividend will therefore be based on the value of NAO shares at the close of NYSE August 8, 2014."
I said close of trading price, NAT says close of trading price. How do you then say I'm "dead wrong"?
You screwed up, mr_brightside_xy, and now you're trying to deny it by screwing up some more. Instead of getting defensive, why don't you learn to understand what you read?
Well, at least your stupidity is consistent. That means anything you claim can be dismissed as wrong. Saves time. Thanks.
"Where is that "cwn600" to see what he's got to say now?"
You want me to clear up your confusion, do you? Sure. Since you can't figure it out for yourself, I'd be glad to.
"I've been a GERON shareholder for about 4-5 years, I sold June 26th and got back in July 8th, that shouldn't matter cause I was a shareholder as of May 28th, 2014."
Being a shareholder on May 28th doesn't have anything to do with it, since you bought back in before the ex-date. It is the ex-date that determines who gets the dividend, not the record date, and the ex-date has not yet been established. Why do you think the company said today that any shareholder of record on May28th who sells their shares before the ex-date is also selling their right to receive the Asterias shares? When you sold GERN on June 26 you also sold your right to the Asterias spinoff. But you bought back your right to the Asterias shares when you bought GERN back on July 8th. The right to the spinoff is attached to the GERN shares until the close of trading on the distribution date. That is the purpose of the due bills.
Have any of those facts penetrated your closed mind?
Your memory is very selective. Your exact response to my explanation was "I don't read it that way." (mr_brightside_xy • Jun 23, 2014 2:17 PM)
"are the shares of asterias, which is not actually a ticker, going to instantly convert into warrants to buy BTX?"
No. Upon completion of the spinoff of the Asterias shares, the BTX warrants will then be distributed to the new Asterias shareholders, that's all. The Asterias shares don't convert into anything.
"the price will crash for sure after the distribution, if it happens as you are suggesting"
The Asterias shares aren't worth enough to crash the GERN price on the ex-date, are they?
"when I search I don't find the info that you are referring to"
That's pretty hard to believe. A google search for "deferred ex-date" (including the quotation marks) turns up good explanations on several sites. A search for "deferred ex-date" without the quotation marks puts at the top of the return list a link to the New York Stock Exchange Listed Company Manual. Click on that link and it tells you more than you'd ever want to know, but if you scroll down to the part with the heading "Deferred "Ex" date and Use of Due Bills" it says, "When the issuance of a stock dividend, or stock distribution, or subscription right is subject to fulfillment of some requirement or condition (such as further corporate action, or action or approval by some public authority) which will not be fulfilled before the normal "ex" date, "ex" dealings are deferred and due-bills are used until a specific date subsequent to the date on which the prerequisite requirement or condition is to be fulfilled or until further notice if the date of such fulfillment is indeterminate.
The date fixed for "ex" dealings in such a case is usually the first or second business day after the Exchange receives notice that the prerequisite requirement or condition has been fulfilled, depending on the hour at which such notice is received. The date fixed for redemption of due-bills is usually the first or second business day after the mailing of the stock dividend or three business days after the mailing of the distribution shares or the subscription rights.
The deferral of the "ex" date and use of due-bills in situations involving conditional distributions is necessary to avoid the risk that a loss may occur should the prerequisite requirement or condition not be met."
"Why don't you google "date of record" first"
I'll do it for him. From the website Understanding Dividend Dates:
The Purpose of the Record Date
With all dividends, the record date establishes that only the shares outstanding as of that date are eligible for the dividend. With normal dividends that is a moot point because the ex-dividend date, being two business days before the record date, has already established which shares (and which shareholders) qualify for the dividend. But in the case of a dividend of 25% or more of the company's stock price, spinoffs and stock dividends, the ex-dividend date is after the record date, usually many days or weeks after, so the company may, if it chooses to do so, issue additional stock after the record date but before the ex-dividend date without affecting the gross amount of the declared dividend. While occasions of a secondary offering during such a period are rare, there are many more instances of shares being issued through dividend reinvestment plans and through exercise of stock options and convertible securities.
In cases of a deferred ex-date, the only function of the record date is to determine on which shares the dividend is paid. Because of that -- and this is a critical point -- it is the ex-dividend date that determines who qualifies for the dividend, not the record date.
"why should I care about something that is not mentioned in the SEC filing, but only on a message board?"
Wrong question. Right question: Why do you keep posting about something you claim to care nothing about?
"Are any of you guys just a little surprised that GERN would TODAY issue a memo through the brokers and NOT tell us when the distribution date for the Asterias shares is?"
Not at all. This is quite common with spinoffs. The distribution date isn't established yet, but they're trying to clear up some of the confusion over who gets the Asterias shares. They're doing a poor job of it, but at least they're trying.
"I see nothing in the SEC filing about a deferred ex-date."
You sure are persistent for somebody who claims he doesn't care what happens.
"do you have more information to provide other than the SEC filing"
Yes, I have more information to provide other than the SEC filing. I've been providing it here over and over and over again, all the while urging people like you to research it for yourself, but all you do is deny, deny, deny. And you have the chutzpa to claim you don't care!
More often than not, companies issuing dividends don't ever mention the ex-date because it's not the company that sets the ex-date, it's the stock exchange. When the ex-date comes after the record date instead of before it, it's called a deferred ex-date. Although the SEC itself doesn't use that exact term, on its website it does describe the circumstances of when such an ex-date is used, and the consequences of selling the underlying stock before the deferred ex-date: "Sometimes a company pays a dividend in the form of stock rather than cash. The stock dividend may be additional shares in the company or in a subsidiary being spun off. The procedures for stock dividends may be different from cash dividends. The ex-dividend date is set the first business day after the stock dividend is paid (and is also after the record date).
If you sell your stock before the ex-dividend date, you also are selling away your right to the stock dividend. Your sale includes an obligation to deliver any shares acquired as a result of the dividend to the buyer of your shares, since the seller will receive an I.O.U. or "due bill" from his or her broker for the additional shares."
"Are you guys just trying to keep people from dumping the stock"
Ah, the last refuse of the ignorant -- accuse others of nefarious purposes. How does that help you to understand what's really happening?