4 ms·
> at one point was worth $1M. which isn't even true if you can't sell it. If you can't sell it, it's worth "$0". I actually don't understand what the article
by radarsat1 10y ago
> at one point was worth $1M.
which isn't even true if you can't sell it. If you can't sell it, it's worth "$0".
I actually don't understand what the article describes, this "lock-out" period. Is it actually a common thing? Isn't the stock price set by people willing to buy? If it can't be sold, how can there be a price?
- misja111 10y agoThis lock-out period is something you can subscribe for voluntarily. It is mostly done for company founders whose company goes to the stock exchange; you don't want them to immediately sell all their shares because they would flood the market. In this case the author got a better deal for the conversion of his shares, for which he was apparently willing to lock up his position. That's why I don't understand the author's surprise that the stock price was moving after the reverse split. Of course there were other parties which didn't sign such a deal.
- mholmes680 10y agoI don't know about common, but its a thing - likely because of the "preferred shares" class. This guy doesn't seem too big on reading the fine print: invests in Penny stocks and doesn't realize risk? Invests $100k without finding out details? Doesn't know what preferred shares are? Figured 1:1000 (public deal) and 1:30 / 3:1 (his deal) was exactly the same?