321PMAC wrote: TGIF’s primary revenue contributors are Alternative Medicine Association (AMA) and Infused MFG, each of which are 91% owned subsidiaries to TGIF.
The revenue contribution spread between each of these entities is ~66% in favor of AMA to ~33% for Infused MFG; this can be corroborated through TGIF’s latest Investors Presentation.
The proposed spin-out of Infused MFG prior to the acquisition closing will effectively reduce TGIF revenue contribution by ~33%.
TGIF today has a market cap of ~$200m. That is ~$1.00/s with 200m I/O predicated on revenue from each of the subsidiaries.
TGIF’s market cap post spin-out will be ~135m. That is ~$0.68/s with 200m I/O predicated on revenue from one subsidiary – AMA.
Nevada Medical Group, BaM’s 100% wholly owned subsidiary, currently operates a 20k sf cannabis cultivation production facility.
AMA, TGIF’s 91% wholly owned subsidiary, currently operates a 10k sf cannabis cultivation production facility.
The current terms of acquisition are beyond inequitable.
BaM’s operational capacity is 2x that of TGIF, BaM has ~10m USD cash on hand as opposed to TGIF’s ~10m CAD, and BaM will achieve phased expansion at a faster rate relative to TGIF (30k sf existing building adjacent to BaM’s 20k sf facility vs. TGIF new build that is still in design development) – Yet, BaM shareholders are being offered ~60% of TGIF’s valuation post-Infused MFG spin-out (~$78m vs 135m).
Full disclosure – as a previous TGIF shareholder I reallocated 100% of my TGIF position into BaM. My current spread is < 1.65:1,="" meaning,="" i="" am="" in="" a="" profitable="" position="" should="" the="" acquisition="" close="" under="" the="" current="" contemplated="" terms.="" however,="" i="" am="" in="" no="" way="" supportive="" of="" the="" contemplated="" terms="" and="" will="" happily="" vote="" to="" decline="" the="">
If BaM’s production capacity out of a 20k sf facility is half that of TGIF’s, BaM would trade at a ~$2.87/s equivalent.
teetznazz wrote:
47,704,269 x $1.65 = $78,712,043.85
Now shareholders will need to vote on if they are willing to let their company go at that valuation.