RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Dilution is coming in my opinion. However it doesn’t meanTouran77 wrote: ridingrockets wrote: Enough already. The note holder most likely (I am not the note holder nor work for them) DOES NOT WANT TO OWN 9.99% -
THEY DO NOT WANT TO EXCEED 9.99% - What happens if they exceed 9.99%? A whole different ballgame for the note holder to sum it up.
The note holder will drive this company down. They do not care about HEXO - They care about their $$$$ - If HEXO somehow had a bevy of investors waiting to scoop up cheap shares it means nothing to the shareholder.
What likely matters is:
1- not exceeding 9.99% of the company at any point
2- making sure they get their payments
If they care about holding HEXO shares they can easily use their ~20 million dollar monthly payment to buy some on the free market.
Enough pushing wishes dreams and all the other BS - The note holder has HEXO between a rock and a hard place. HEXO failed Q1 and it only made it worst. Now in addition to the rock and hard place their back is up against the wall.
Touran77 wrote: VeritasVern wrote: Touran77 wrote: VeritasVern wrote: Touran77 wrote: quinlash wrote: Ok guys, one comment on it and that should put it to rest....
YOU CANNOT SHORT WITH A NOTE -> Only Shares. Either directly or with Calls and Puts.
Be sure to Google and understand each of these
What is a stock share
What is a stock warrant
What is a stock option
What is a debenture
You should also be google:
What does it mean to short a stock
What is a short squeeze
That is not what we are saying.
We are saying that they are naked shorting and covering with shares they get/got through monthly redemptions.
Touran
right,and why would they short and want to drive the price down? So they can get as many shares as cheap as they can?
You realize the Note holder has a lein on all Hexo assest, so in the event of a Bankruptcy they essentially own Hexo. Not that I think that would happen, you would have to be nuts to believe that...wait I take that back, I was wrong using that comment in past, anything is possible... Based on the money owed to the Note holder and the current price, it is easy to see they could easily be majority owners of this company, They will then drive the price up and sell it to the highest bidder would be my guess. Hexo is however, trying to deal with the Note and given they have no free assests avail as collateral, as the Note holder has first lein on them the only other option is dilution but that will be addressed between now and March 8th. So for Hexo investors sake you better hope the sp rises between now and late Feb or it is done at these low prices.I think the only other alternative is to make a "deal" with the Note holder but the holder holds all the cards so t would be at their advantage and would still imply large dilution and they owning majority of Hexo. I do see we hit a new all*time low today of 80 cents.
Verny still don'f inderstand that the note holder cannot own more than 9.99% in Hexo even after I provided him the exact document plus what yo research.
Nothing more to add.
Touran
Sure I understand that but why would they continue to be interested in shorting Hexo based on the following you said. "We are saying that they are naked shorting and covering with shares they get/got through monthly redemptions."
the purpose of that is what? Earlier you said they were at the 10% threshold and weren't interested in a lower sp, so which is it?
And now a new all-time low of 79 cents. What's your candle showing us Tourran, more downside? Is Hexo in negotiations with the Note holder for a deal of shares to pay off the Note?
Simple math Verny.
You have 10% ownership.
You sell 5% let say between 1 and 0.80 as it drives SP down.
That way you can receive monthly redemption to replenish up to 10% your ownership and at a lower SP. Sell high buy low.
Now, if you had the ability to read, you would know that I specifically said that they couldn't do this forever as at one point, when SP is so low, Hexo will be able to find group of investors ready to buy a lot. That would result in Hexo having cash to pay redemptions instead of issuing shares to Note holder. Note holder would be stucked with not owning 10% of Hexo and wouldn't be happy about it in my opinion.
Really easy to understand and I really just only copy paste from one post to another to you, so why don't you read again when you dont understand instead of making me repeat :p.
Touran
Sorry Riding but I think you are wrong with that one.
1. why would there be a close where they cannot own more than 9.99% if they had 0 intention of going over. Of course we all know that there is a lots of rules and reporting if they are over 10%, but they are able to calculate themselves and not go over. They would just not go over it. That close was there to protect Hexo from hostile takeover in my opinion.
2. If they receive cash and by at market, that would create extreme pressure on the buying side and would increase SP, which is not what they want as they want shares as cheap as possible.
Touran
Touran, don';t dismiss me like I don't understand, bc you are the contradiction--- You said receiving monthly redemptions but then shorting the stock, now you say receiving monthly redeptions but selling 5% of the stock?? Those are two dfferent things clearly. Frankly there is no way of you or I knowing what they are actually doing but I think there are two options, entertain a buyout from other LPs or negotiate a settlement with the Note holder. Take your pick but at a new all-time low of 77 cents...this is looking deperate. Market cap of $275 Cdn but they own the Note holder upwards of $380-400 million. LOL Rockets was correct in saying, as was I the risk of buying at this juncture comes with too much risk.