DDD, this does get kind of boring after awhile.
You state last week you want to compare apples to apples. Well, you are comparing apples to oranges. T
You ended your rebuttal with this.
"Well, I now think it was kind of another attempt to discredit me instead of challenging my formula/objective but hey, I'm glad if you learned from it!"
Well, unfortunately I did not learn a thing from it. Except that in your calculations, you are mixing numbers from Oct 15, then post placement closings, and then other numbers from post merger. You can't do that.
When calculating SGNL shares... first, you are using numbers from a possible upsize in the placement. I wouldn't do that, because it may not happen. But ok. It doesn't make a huge difference anyway.
You mixing numbers from NEXG shares outstanding on Oct 15 and the market cap, with numbers of shares that will be outstanding for SGNL after they issues over 100 million more shares. That is not apples to apples.
Market caps as of Oct 15... but issued shares after the placement closes, and is actually upsized again.
Using your logic in seeing this as appropriate... the market caps after the placement are not relevant... according to your calculations.
When SGNL raises $10 million or whatever it ends up being, to be closed the beginning of Nov, do you expect there market cap to stay the same? I would think that it should increase by about $10 million. But if you want to keep the old market cap numbers. and SGNL and NEXG stay the same, there will be some annoyed investors. Because if you still have a market cap of $21 million or so, but if there is 373.9 million shares o/s, well that will make the price of SGNL at 0.056 cents. That's the type of thing that happens when you mix numbers from before the financing closes with numbers from after the financing closes.
The same is true for NEXG. When they have an extra $8 million dollars next week, in theory there market cap should increase by a similar amount.
You have to use all numbers from the same time... either all before the closing, all after the closing, or all after the merger takes place(assuming it does).
(btw, if you didn't realize, the reason SGNL's percentage of the new NEXG is increasing... it is because the placement has already been upsized, and because of the extra funds being raised, they are bringing more to the table).
If the price of a SGNL share has a fair value of 0.13 as you calculate. Those sellers unloading millions of shares at .08 are really not very smart at all. (They must do math the way I do it). And why is not one other person smart enough to figure out that it is worth .13 now. I'm sure lots have tried to calculate it. It surprises me that with the $20 million or so being raised between the two companies, not one single person has gone in and spent the $350 000 to buy out that 3.5 million shares for sale 0.10. It seems like easy money. I think you are the only one who understands your logic and realizes it's value is 0.13 now.
All shareholders of the new NEXG will suffer with the dilution of the warrants. The warrants on both sides of the deal. That is if the shares of sgnl are worth .13 and the warrants are already in the money.
You started your post with " Impressive curriculum. But I do not think advanced maths are required: only simple calculations and basic logic is required."
The quote I made actually was a bit tongue in cheek. Because only simple calculations and basic logic is required. But you are not getting the simple logic part of it correct.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
If you can't baffle them with brilliance.... baffle them with B---S---.
Good luck