Post by lookingforatenbagger on Mar 18, 2024 16:34:18 GMT
You just can't handle not being agreed with, can you? I try and let it go. I post that it is a non issue, but no. You erase part of my post, take it out of context, and then lie and accusing me of spreading false information? Why?
How many times will you violate the TOS without apology?
The Sema4 attorneys included standard conditions that would allow adjustments to the closing price PAID, based on meaningful discrepancies in the financials after due diligence. But Opko investors weren't afforded the same protections, for the price RECEIVED, against changes the price of the largest component of the total sales consideration.
If Schlumberger agreed to sell its Russian based operations to Rosneft for the equivalent a few billion dollars in Russian rubles, do you think the contract would include some kind of cushion for SLB shareholders against a meaningful decline in the value of the ruble prior to closing date?
I understand that Opko made a deal for a fixed amount of money and a fixed number of shares.
I understand that there was no "make whole clause."
I understand Opko was at risk for a decline in price.
I understand that Opko could have walked away, but did the deal anyway.
I understand the number of shares did not decline and that the value of the shares was fixed on April 29, 2022 (not May 2nd. I was wrong about that)
I made no comment on anything other than that.
I also understand that the only thing that really matters today is,
"At the end FY23 WGS was valued at, $2.75/share with 26.05M shares outstanding, or $71.6M making Opko's FY23 holding worth $9.8M". As I type WGS is trading at $10.77 making Opko's holding valued at $36.4M. It may be more or less by the end of this quarter.
"Currently Opko's 13.7% comes to ~3.57M shares. Divided by Opko's ~700M outstanding shares each Opko share "owns" ~0.005 of a WGS share. Roughly speaking every $10 increase in WGS' share price will increase Opko's share value by a nickel. As some will be quick to point out, this is unrelated to earnings, even though the mark to value will show up as such in the headline earnings per share number. In short, it is a one time paper gain."
I also understand you erase part of my post, took it out of context, and then lied and accused me of spreading false information.
How many times will you violate the TOS without apology?