Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canabrava Diamond -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: m.philli who wrote (1267)	4/28/1999 2:39:00 PM
From: whisky	Respond to of 2402

Mike In all honesty, I can't see that happening. To many shareholders of CNB have paid substantially more for their shares than the current price. Me included. Say for argument sake you have 2 different investors. Along termer who bought 5k at 4 bucks, which is 20k and a new investor who bought 5k at a buck. Now to subscribe to the theory or fairness to the long termer does he recieve 1 or 2 k of SWG now for 20k, whereas the new investor would recieve 1 or 2 k of SWG for 5k. There is to many long term shareholders who would argue that that is not fair. To take any other ratios would also prove to be very unfair to long termers. However you never know because with SWG controlling 60 % of CNB, they can virtually do anything they want. But I would suspect that Some large holders of CNB, such as Global Strategy would object vehemently to such a move as they are averaged in at over 4 dollars per share. Besides I think with SWG filing forms with the exchange of their intention to sell upwards of 3 million shares of CNB sometime in the future, I assume they are looking at this opportunity to fill their treasury once they decide to let everyone else in on their game. 3 million shares averaged out at say 5-10 bucks would add upwards of 15-30 million dollars, which would look very good on the balance sheet. Certainly it is worth more to them in this scenario than if they were to forgo the opportunity of filling their treasury. In other words why give up 15-30 million bucks to have more control over something you already have control of. I think the reason they did all these financing was to have some play shares to reward the parent for supporting them, when no one else would. Not to mention the fact that this company will never be a takeover target when it is impossible to get 50.1% of the outstanding issue. This company as John Kaiser said has excellent structure, and he was right.