SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Web Capital Group (WBCG), mini-CMGI
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hamiltonian who wrote (7)3/7/2000 1:53:00 PM
From: Toby Zidle  Read Replies (1) of 15
 
Perhaps there's (almost) no one out there listening any more. This board hasn't been a hotbed of activity. Here's my view of the latest press release (and it's not pretty):

I'm always suspicious of the mergers with internal subsidiaries. There's no external reference for the value (if any) of the subsidiary. There's no place a shareholder of WBCG can find financials that tell him his equity stake isn't being ripped off to favor selected insiders.

The press release goes on to say: "Web Capital Ventures, Inc. will exchange 1 share of its stock (Valued at $10 per share) for every one (1) share of 3wVentures.com, Inc. currently not acquired by the acquisition of Web Capital Group, Inc. This Transaction will be valued at $33 Million."

Who owns these shares of 3wVentures that WBCG hasn't already acquired? Who does come out $33 million ahead here? I don't know. But you can probably guess at that as well as I can.

And the objective of the merger? "Upon completion of the merger, Web Capital Ventures will file a registration statement for an Initial Public Offering and apply for listing on the Nasdaq NMS exchange."

The predecessor to WBCG, Sara Hallitex (SHAL), already had NASD NMS status. How and why was that given up not so very long ago?

This whole entire internal merger looks wrong to me. It looks manipulative and not to the best interests of outside shareholders of WBCG.

Anyone else have a different interpretation?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News