ww You put a lot of work into that response. Thanks, I'm sure it is interesting on some level for many.
The difficulty is it has almost nothing to do with PABN:
"Let me walk you through the 2 possible scenarios:
1. We agree that for PanAm (Nevada) to reverse merge with PRWT, the mechanism of the transaction is that PRWT issues NEW shares to the owners/shareholders of the acquired company. "
"...the acquired company."
Sorry, this was not an acquisition. If you review what you wrote, I think you'll see that some of it is based on a the mechanics of an acquisition, not a merger or reverse merger.
Since you've made a fundamental error in your assumptions, and then based conclusions on that error, I don't know how to proceed with a discussion. I've seen conversations go on for many many posts because of such a misunderstanding at the beginning, all to no end, and the audience either gets bored or mislead. I'm sure you'd agree that the better goal is for our audience to be enlightened as a result of our conversation.
Please, I'd like to discuss some of this with you, but in order for it to be revelent to PABN, it should be based on what we know about PABN. What we know is that PRWT and PanAm NV were not joined by an acquisition. It was a reverse merger.
Thanks for "You know PCM, reading through your response, I actually started to feel sorry for you. Either you truly are an innocent and do not know how these things work - or someone is giving you very bad guidance..." Kind, even if condescending. But I think it is you who does not know how these things work.
PCM
GO PABN!!! |
