RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Today's TriviaCan't we put this argument to bed? It's been going on since the PP. Somepeople like, some don't. Both sides have eloquently stated their positions and further posting won't change peoples' opinions.
PPs are necessary but timing and amount are always in question. Better immediate liquidity, with (likely) greater dilution vs expected higher share price - and less dilution, but greater funding risk - if you wait until a future date.
GBR, as I've mentioned before, tries to have liquidity for around 2 years of funding needs. They just raised funding with Flow Through Shares and normal shares, the latter at a discount to the market prices. (Last I looked, I was up about 15x on GBR so it's my favorite example of a company that does it right.)
Can we just call it a draw and move on to other topics?
(If anyone has a good explanation of Flow Through Shares, I'd appreciate it. I know it involves tax breaks for Canadians, but don't understand the mechanics. I assume that since the company gets a higher price - C$17 flow through vs C$11 normal in the case of GBR - that GBR has to somehow pay the taxes on the flow through shares.)