"The steep discounted shares for services have been mentioned by AFR back in December 17. What's the big deal "
What's making me uncomfortable at this point is the deal with FC Capital. It was sealed back in 2015, and implemented during 2016 and described as generating sponsorship revenue. No mention, to my knowledge, was ever made of issuing shares for their services ; it was supposed to be a partnership. If I'm wrong here, I'd like someone to point me in the right direction.
Since then, barely any mention has been made of their role and the partnership. The notice of AGM for 2016 talks about revenue from sponsorship (about $500 000) but no trace has been seen of them advertising on the videos they're supposed to sponsor (once again, would love to be proven wrong).
Which leads us to one conclusion : because the beneficiaries of BIG's issues of shares don't need to disclose it, we don't actually know who receives those millions of shares for services rendered.
So there is a possibility, as bad as it sounds, that BIG has been, for years, issuing shares to FC Capital so that they can manage to finance the production by BIG of the videos for customers who may not be paying...a single dollar. The idea being that BIG shareholders are financing their one company up until the point where....someone notices the scheme, and the house of cards collapses, like a good old ponzi, specialty of Richard Evertz.
We don't know how many SME have actually been paying for the videos, and what percentage of the business in generated through Finstro (FCC).
The light in the darkness ?
- This doesn't seem to be the case in the US, which means that the business model over there should be working without the need of a finance provider. So even if the SP falls further down next week, there is hope that further down it may recover thanks to a strong US activity.
- The shares for service rendered are usually vested for a certain amount of time and the share price fluctuates, which would make it hard for FC Capital to predict what revenue they would get from it, and thus to participate in such dodgy deal. Unless they get so many shares that it doesn't even matter.
This is my opinion only and I am not an expert at all in this field. There are many aspects of this problem that I don't understand very clearly.
One thing is for sure ; BIG must disclose the recipients of all future issues of shares to avoid distrust and rumors.
I seriously hope all this is just b******t and that I'm just making this up...if not on Monday my hard earned money will be gone.
Feel free to prove me wrong on as many aspects of this as you can so that I can have a good night of sleep this weekend...
Expand
