Small-Cap Reverse Mergers Poised for a Comeback
The good news about reaching bottom is that the only place to go from there is up. As I have blogged about recently, since 2009, the small cap and reverse merger market has diminished greatly. According to industry statistics, 2011 was the slowest year for reverse mergers since 2004.
To reiterate my previous blogs, I can identify at least seven main reasons for the downfall of the reverse merger market. Briefly, those reasons are: (1) the general state of the economy, plainly stated, it’s not good; (2) backlash from a series of fraud allegations, SEC enforcement actions, and trading suspensions of Chinese company’s following reverse mergers; (3) the 2008 Rule 144 amendments including the prohibition of use of the rule for shell company and former shell company shareholders; (4) problems clearing penny stock with broker dealers and FINRA enforcement of broker dealer due diligence on penny stocks; (5) DTC scrutiny and difficulty in obtaining clearance following a reverse merger or other corporate restructuring; (6) increasing costs of reporting requirements, including the new XBRL requirements; and (7) the new listing requirements imposed by NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ and prohibition against immediate listing following a reverse merger.
However, despite these issues and the chill in the reverse merger market, the fact is that going public is and remains the best way to access capital markets. Public companies will always be able to attract a PIPE investor. For cash poor companies, the use of a trading valuable stock is the only alternative for short term growth and acquisitions. At least in the USA, the stock market, day traders, public market activity and the interest in capital markets will never go away; it will just evolve to meet ever changing demand and regulations.
That very evolution has created new opportunities, including the opportunity for a revived, better, reverse merger market. Certainly there are alternatives to a reverse merger, for instance a company can go public directly either through a private placement followed by S-1 registration statement; a direct public offering (DPO) or especially for those in the internet or tech business, trading on a private company market place (PCMP).
However, each of these alternatives can be difficult and time consuming. Many companies abandon DPO’s or private offerings prior to completion. Raising money for a trading public company is difficult, for a non-trading pre-public company, it can be impossible. Unscrupulous unregistered companies and individuals prey on these entities, taking their time and money and leaving a mess that can take years and more money to clean up.
A reverse merger remains the quickest and cleanest way for a company to go public. The increased difficulties in general and scrutiny by regulators may be just what the industry needed to weed out the unscrupulous players and invigorate this business model. Shell companies will necessarily require greater due diligence up front, if for no other reason than to ensure DTC eligibility and broker dealer tradability. Increased due diligence will result in fewer post merger issues.
The over the counter market should regain credibility and support higher stock prices, since exchanges are forcing companies to trade there for a longer period of time before becoming eligible to move up. Rule 419 SPAC’s may increase providing clean new entities to complete reverse mergers. Resale registration statements, and thus disclosure, may increase to combat the Rule 144 prohibitions. We have already seen greater disclosure by non-reporting entities trading on otcmarkets.com.
In summary, we believe that the issues and setbacks of the reverse merger market since 2008 have primed the pump and created the perfect conditions for a revitalized, better reverse merger market beginning in mid to late 2012.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Change in NYSE and AMEX Listing Requirements For Companies Completing Reverse Mergers with Public Shell Companies Section 3(a)(10) Debt Conversions In a Shell Company Pre-Reverse Merger »
Change in NYSE and AMEX Listing Requirements For Companies Completing Reverse Mergers with Public Shell Companies
On November 8, 2011 the SEC granted an accelerated approval to a proposed rule change initiated by the NYSE AMEX, whereby the NYSE AMEX amended its rules so that a Company that goes public via a reverse merger with a shell company, must wait at least one year to apply for listing on the NYSE exchange. The NASDAQ exchange proposed, and presumably will have approved, a substantially similar rule. The complete rule change is available on the SEC website.
In response to recent reverse merger abuses, primarily involving accounting fraud related to Chinese company reverse mergers, in July, 2011, the NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ exchanges proposed more stringent listing requirements for companies seeking to become listed following a reverse merger with a shell company. The rule change prohibits a reverse merger company from applying to list until the combined entity had traded in the U.S. over the counter market, on another national securities exchange, or on a regulated foreign exchange, for at least one year following the filing of all required information about the reverse merger transaction, including audited financial statements. In addition, new rules require that the new reverse merger company has filed all its required reports for the one year period, including at least one annual report.
In addition, the new rule requires that the reverse merger company “maintain a closing stock price equal to the stock price requirement applicable to the initial listing standard under which the reverse merger company is qualifying to list for a sustained period of time, but in no event for less than 30 of the most recent 60 trading days prior to the filing of the initial listing application.”
The rule includes some exceptions for companies that complete a firm commitment offering resulting in net proceeds of at least $40 million dollars.
In addition to the specific additional listing requirements contained in the new rule, the Exchange may “in its discretion impose more stringent requirements than those set forth above if the Exchange believes it is warranted in the case of a particular reverse merger company based on, among other things, an inactive trading market in the reverse merger company’s securities, the existence of a low number of publicly held shares that are not subject to transfer restrictions, if the reverse merger company has not had a Securities Act registration statement or other filing subjected to a comprehensive review by the SEC, or if the reverse merger company has disclosed that it has material weaknesses in its internal controls which have been identified by management and/or the reverse merger company’s independent auditor and has not yet implemented an appropriate corrective action plan.”
In discussing and approving the new rules the SEC noted that the listing standards “provide the means for an exchange to screen issuers that seek to become listed, and to provide listed status only to those that are bona fide companies with sufficient public float, investor base, and trading interest likely to generate depth and liquidity sufficient to promote fair and orderly markets.”
Theoretically, making it more difficult and expensive for reverse merger Companies to list on a major exchange will result in a massive resurgence of issuers seeking to trade on the OTCBB (OTCQB). When all is said and done, and no one has a crystal ball, the OTCBB and OTCQB may be the new home for even larger more established reverse merger companies simply because they are required to trade as such for twelve months before graduating to a larger exchange or because they fall short of listing requirements by so much as a single criteria.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Rule 144 Seller’s Representation Letter Small-Cap Reverse Mergers Poised for a Comeback »
Rule 144 Seller’s Representation Letter
Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) Rule 144 sets forth certain requirements for the use of Section 4(1) for the resale of securities. Section 4(1) of the Securities Act provides an exemption for a transaction “by a person other than an issuer, underwriter, or dealer.” “Issuer” and “dealer” have pretty straight forward meanings under the Securities Act but the term “underwriter” does not. Rule 144 provides a safe harbor from the definition of “underwriter”. If all the requirements for Rule 144 are met, the seller will not be deemed an underwriter and the purchaser will receive unrestricted securities.
Following the amendments to Rule 144 in 2008, a shareholder cannot simply have a legend removed from restricted shares following the holding period, but rather, must have a present intent to sell in order to have a legend removed. Moreover, following the revisions in 2008, Rule 144 is not available to shell companies, or former shell companies that are not current in their Exchange Act filing requirements. The requirements of Rule 144 must exist as of the date of sale.
Although not set out in the statute, all transfer agents and Issuers, and most clearing and brokerage firms, require an opinion of counsel as to the application of Rule 144 prior to removing the legend from securities and allowing their sale under Rule 144. An opinion letter is generally valid for ninety (90) days from the date of issuance. Accordingly, an attorney may issue an opinion and a transfer agent act to remove a restrictive legend, following which, the requirements of Rule 144 may no longer be valid (such as if a former shell company fails to file its quarterly report or ceases operations and becomes a shell, etc..)
In other words, attorneys, transfer agents and brokers must be certain that all of the conditions of Rule 144 are met prior to taking action to remove a restrictive legend, but only the Seller can ensure that all the conditions are present at the actual time of sale. In order to protect themselves in issuing opinion letters and removing legends, transfer agents and most attorneys now require a letter from the Seller making certain representations and affirmations regarding their eligibility to rely on Rule 144 in the sale of their securities. This letter is commonly referred to as a Seller’s Representation Letter.
The affirmations commonly required and contained in the Seller’s Representation Letter, are:
1. The Seller is the beneficial owner of the subject securities;
2. The Seller has been the beneficial owner of the subject securities for the required holding period (the holding period varies from six months to one year depending on whether the Issuing Company is subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended);
3. Confirmation that the Seller is not an affiliate of the Issuing Company and has not been an affiliate for at least 3 months, or that the Seller is an affiliate and is therefore subject to the Rule 144 volume restrictions on sales (drip rules);
4. Confirmation that the Seller is not an underwriter and is not selling the securities for the purpose of making a distribution for or on behalf of the Issuer;
5. Confirmation that the Seller is selling for his/her own account and not for the benefit of a third party, or the Issuer; and
6. Confirmation that the Seller is aware of the Rule 144 requirements and will sell only in accordance with such requirements, including the manner of sale requirements (through a broker).
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« SEC Staff Review of Super 8-K’s Change in NYSE and AMEX Listing Requirements For Companies Completing Reverse Mergers with Public Shell Companies »
SEC Staff Review of Super 8-K’s
On September 14, 2011 the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Division of Corporate Finance issued disclosure guidance entitled “Staff Observations in the Review of Forms 8-K Filed to Report Reverse Mergers and Similar Transactions.” This blog is a summary of that guidance.
The SEC guidance is a summary of common SEC staff comments in response to Form 8-Ks filed following a reverse merger or similar transaction which results in a company ceasing to be a shell company (commonly referred to as a Super 8-K ). The SEC has discovered that filings often fail to provide all the necessary disclosures under Items 2.01, 5.01 and 9.01 of Form 8-K. Moreover, the SEC frequently asks companies to support their conclusion that they are not a shell company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Item 2.01 of Form 8-K entitled, Completion of Acquisition or Disposition of Assets, generally requires a company to provide information following a transaction that is outside the ordinary course of business. The SEC reminds companies that an asset acquisition can result in a company no longer being a shell company in the same way that a business acquisition can. In the event that the asset acquisition results in the Company no longer being a shell company, all information required in a Form 10 Registration Statement, must be filed in a Super 8-K within four (4) days of the closing of the transaction. The SEC disclosure guidance states that “we frequently remind companies that Instruction 2 to Item 2.01 makes clear that the term “acquisition” includes every purchase, acquisition by lease, exchange, merger, consolidation, succession or other acquisition”. Moreover, when a company’s reverse merger or similar transaction includes an asset acquisition as defined in Item 2, then an Item 2.01 disclosure is also required.
Item 5.01 requires disclosures regarding a change of control. The SEC frequently reminds filers that they must include all the disclosures required by this Item when filing a Super 8-K.
Item 9.01 is the Financial Statements and Exhibits section of the Form 8-K. The SEC frequently reminds filers that they must include historical financial statements of the acquired private operating business. In particular, the Form 8-K must include two years of audited financial statements and unaudited, reviewed stub periods to the date of filing. In addition, a Company must include pro forma financial information accounting for the combined companies.
Furthermore, in addition to filing Form 10 information on the acquired company, a company must file Form 10 exhibits on the acquired company, such as significant contracts. If these documents are not in English (as is often seen with Chinese companies and corresponding reverse mergers), the exhibits must also include a translation into English.
The SEC also provided guidance on the Form 10 information disclosure required by a Super 8-K. The SEC indicated that it often requests that a filer enhance its discussion of its business operations under Item 101 of Regulation S-K to include additional information about the planned future operations of the now non-shell Company. In particular, the SEC likes to see clear disclosure on how a company generates or intends to generate revenue.
In a company’s management discussion and analysis provided pursuant to Item 3.03, the SEC often asks companies to identify any elements of historical income or loss that will discontinue as a result of the reverse merger or similar transaction.
In its discussion of directors and executive officers, the SEC often has to remind companies to include all of the information required on the new officers and directors and to discuss their respective experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills that resulted in them being in an executive position.
Finally, the SEC often issues comments requesting more extensive and detailed disclosure on executive compensation and related party transactions following a reverse merger or similar transaction.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation (MD&A) Rule 144 Seller’s Representation Letter »
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation (MD&A)
Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operation, commonly referred to as MD&A is an integral parts of annual (Form 10-K) and quarterly (Form 10-Q) reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). MD&A is also included in registration statements filed under both the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Form 10) and Securities Act of 1933 (Form S-1). MD&A requires the most input and effort from officers and directors of a company and due to the many components of required information, often generates SEC review and comments. Item 303 of Regulation S-K sets forth the required content for MD&A.
A MD&A discussion for quarterly reports on Form 10-Q is abbreviated from the requirements for annual reports on Form 10-K and registration statements. Although quarterly reports must discuss each item enumerated below the discussion is expected to be more focused concentrating on the most relevant and material items. In addition, as with my other blogs, this discussion will be limited to the requirements for small public companies (i.e. those with revenues of less than $75 million).
The SEC has issued guidance and interpretation on MD&A, which is helpful in understanding its required content. Pursuant to the SEC, MD&A has three primary purposes. These are:
• to provide a narrative explanation of a company’s financial statements that enables investors to see the company through the eyes of management;
• to enhance the overall financial disclosure and provide the context within which financial information should be analyzed; and
• to provide information about the quality of, and potential variability of, a company’s earnings and cash flow, so that investors can ascertain the likelihood that past performance is indicative of future performance.
Management, and company counsel, should keep these purposes in mind in drafting and finalizing MD&A. The content should not be overly technical, but neither should it be a forum for marketing content. Now, onto the specific MD&A requirements as set forth in Item 303 of Regulation S-K.
In each annual report on Form 10-K, and registration statements on either Forms 10 or S-1, a company must discuss its financial condition, changes in financial condition and results of operations. In addition to the four areas of discussion listed below, a company must include any other relevant information within its knowledge, which information provides a better or more complete understanding of their finances and financial condition. The four areas of financial discussion include:
A company must identify any known trends or known demands, commitments, events or uncertainties that will result in or reasonably could result in an increase or decrease in liquidity. In addition, a company must identify sources and uses of liquidity and any known changes thereto. Explanations of the information provided is required. In layman terms, liquidity is a discussion of sources of cash and uses of cash, and factors that could change or impact either, both as reflected in the financial period covered by the subject report, and for the future. Although not all inclusive, the discussion, at a minimum, should address all items included in the statement of cash flows provided as part of the financial statements. This item, together with the second area of discussion, capital resources, are considered so important the SEC has issued an interpretive release addressing these two areas separately from the rest of MD&A.
A discussion of capital resources includes all material commitments for capital expenditures, the purpose and the source of funds for these commitments. This would include outstanding debts and obligations and simply put, where the money will come from to pay them. In addition, capital resources include a discussion of trends, favorable and unfavorable, that could impact capital resources. An obvious example would be a change in government regulation directly related to the company’s business.
Results of operations include four areas of discussion: (i) unusual or infrequent events that have impacted on a company’s financial condition. An example would be a discontinuance of a specific product line, or sale of company subsidiary. (ii) trends that could have an impact on sales or revenues or income in general, including trends impacting costs and expenses; (iii) a narrative discussion of increases or decreases in sale or revenues; and (iv)impact of inflation and other external financial conditions.
Off balance sheet arrangements have gained notoriety as a result of the recent economic turmoil caused by the mortgage scandal. An off balance sheet arrangement is any arrangement that could have an impact on a balance sheet, the most obvious example being a guarantee of a third party’s obligation. Accordingly, if a company has such an arrangement to report, they are required to provide a detailed analysis including the potential impact and relative importance of the arrangement.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Form 10-Q – Quarterly Reports SEC Staff Review of Super 8-K’s »
Form 10-Q – Quarterly Reports
All companies that are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) are required to file quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. As my clients are all smaller reporting companies (less than $75 million a year in revenues) and non-accelerated filers, this article will be limited to a discussion of those filers. Form 10-Q must be filed within 45 days of the end of each of the first 3 fiscal quarters of the Company.
A Form 10-K is filed following the end of the fourth fiscal quarter and will be the subject of an upcoming article.
Each filer has the right to file for an extension on Form 12b-25 which will not result in the filing being deemed delinquent. Extensions must be filed no later than the due date of the 10-Q and extends the filing time for up to 5 calendar days.
The cover page of the Form 10-Q contains basic company information, including the type and date of the report, the companies’ name and address, SEC filer name, federal tax id number and telephone number. In addition, on the cover page each company must state whether it is a shell company or not by checking a yes or no box. This small piece of information has big ramifications.
Companies that are, or ever were a shell company are severely restricted in the use of Rule 144, may not register the sale of securities accept in accordance with Rule 419 and must file a Super 8-K containing Form 10 type information within four days of a transaction resulting in them no longer being a shell. Attorney practitioners requested to perform services, or investors considering an investment (either through a PIPE or on the open market) should make it standard operating procedure to review historical 10-Q’s for shell company status.
Item 1 of Part I and the bulk of the Form 10-Q are the financial statements. Rule 8-03 regarding interim financial statements for smaller reporting companies provides that “Interim financial statements may be unaudited; however, before filing, interim financial statements included in quarterly reports on Form 10-Q must be reviewed by an independent public accountant using professional standards and procedures for conducting such reviews, as established by generally accepted auditing standards, as may be modified or supplemented by the Commission.”
Interim financial statements must include a balance sheet as of the end of the companies’ most recent fiscal quarter, a balance sheet as of the end of the preceding fiscal year, and income statements and statements of cash flows for the interim period up to the date of such balance sheet and the comparable period of the preceding fiscal year. In addition, the financial statements must include footnotes.
Item 2 of Part I of the Form 10-Q is the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A). In addition to the financial statements, MD&A is arguably the most important part of a Company’s reporting requirement. Moreover, it is MD&A that requires the most effort and care by company management. In a separate blog, following this blog, I will discuss in-depth the requirements for MD&A. However, in short MD&A is a discussion, in layman’s terms, of a Company’s plans of operation, results of operations, liquidity and capital resources.
Item 3 of Part I of the Form 10-Q, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk, is not applicable to smaller reporting companies.
Item 4 (4T for smaller companies) of Part I of the Form 10-Q is an attestation of Controls and Procedures. This item requires the Companies’ principal executive and principal financial officers to attest to the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and financial controls and procedures. This attestation is in addition to the certifications required at the end of both 10-Q’s and 10-K’s. Both this attestation and the certifications are the result of the enactment of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002.
Item I of Part II of Form 10-Q, Legal Proceedings, requires a disclosure of either a new legal proceeding or one in which there has been material development during that particular quarter. Ongoing legal proceedings should be disclosed by reference to the 10-Q in which it was first reported. The disclosure should include the name of the court or agency in which the proceedings are pending, the date instituted, and the principal parties thereto, a description of the factual basis alleged to underlie the proceeding and the relief sought. Moreover, the Company must include similar information as to any such proceedings known to be contemplated by governmental authorities.
Item 1A of Part II of the Form 10-Q, Risk Factors, is not applicable to smaller reporting companies.
Item 2 of Part II of Form 10-Q, Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds, requires that the Company disclose all unregistered issuances of securities, the person(s) to whom issued, the value of the issuance (price paid, debt cancelled, value of services, etc..) and the exemption relied upon for the issuance. Together with registered issuances, an analyst should be able to balance the total reported outstanding securities for each quarter and year, by reviewing a Companies’ Exchange Act reports, including this section of Form 10-Q. The Use of Proceeds disclosure requirement under this Section refers to a disclosure of the Use of Proceeds of any securities sold pursuant to an effective registration statement, if applicable. Finally, a Company must also report any repurchases of its own securities in this section.
Item 3 of Part II of Form 10-Q, Defaults Upon Senior Securities, requires that Companies’ report if there has been any material default in the payment of principal, interest, a sinking or purchase fund installment, or any other material default not cured to any indebtedness exceeding 5% of its total assets.
Item 4 of Part II of Form 10–Q has been removed and is being reserved by the SEC for future use.
Item 5 of Part II of Form 10-Q, Other Information, requires that Companies disclose other material information not otherwise disclosed in this report or previously in a Form 8-K.
Item 6 of Part II of Form 10-Q is a list of exhibits to be included with the Form, including certifications.
A form 10-Q must be signed by the principal executive and principal financial officers. These same individuals are required to execute separate certifications which are attached as exhibits to each Form 10-Q and Form 10-K. By signing the Form 10-Q and certifications, the principal executive and financial officers are attesting personally to the contents of the Form and to the attestations in the certificates and are subject to personal liability therefore.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Mergers and Acquisitions – Deal Protection Measures Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation (MD&A) »
Mergers and Acquisitions – Deal Protection Measures
Many clients ask me how to protect their interests while trying to negotiate a merger or acquisition. During the negotiation period both sides will inevitably incur a certain, acceptable, expenditure of time and expense, and will provide one and other with confidential information. Although a confidentiality agreement protects confidential information, it does not protect against unnecessarily wasting time and expense. Fortunately, there are other measures that can be enacted to safeguard against a flat-out waste of time and money.
Many, if not all, letters of intent contain some sort of exclusivity provision. In deal terminology these exclusivity provisions are referred to as “no shop” or “window shop” provisions. A “no shop” provision prevents one or both parties from entering into any discussions or negotiations with a third party that could negatively affect the potential transaction, for a specific period of time. That period of time may be set in calendar time, such as sixty days, or based on conditions, such as completion of an environmental study, or a combination of both.
A “window shop” provision allows for some level of third-party negotiation or inquiry. Examples of a window shop provision may be that a party cannot solicit other similar transactions, but are not prohibited from hearing out an unsolicited proposal. A window shop provision may also allow the board of directors of a party to shop for a better deal, while giving a right of first refusal if such better deal is indeed received. Window shop provisions generally provide for notice and disclosure of potential “better deals” and either matching or topping rights.
Generally both no shop and window shop provisions provide for a termination fee or other detriment for early termination. The size of the termination fee varies, however, drafters of a letter of intent should be cognizant that if the fee is substantial it likely triggers a reporting and disclosure requirement, which in and of itself could be detrimental to the deal.
Much different from either a no shop or window shop provision is a “go shop” provision. To address a board of directors fiduciary duty in some instances to maximize dollar value for its shareholders, a potential acquirer may request that the target “go shop” for a better deal up front to avoid wasted time and expense. A go shop provision is more controlled than an auction and allows both target and acquiring entities to test the market prior to expending resources.
Another common deal protection is a standstill agreement. A standstill agreement prevents a party from making business changes outside of the ordinary course, during the negotiation period. Example include prohibitions against selling off major assets, incurring extraordinary debts or liabilities, spinning of subsidiaries, hiring or firing management teams and the like.
Finally, many companies protect their interest by requiring significant stockholders to agree to lock-up agreements pending a deal closure. Some lock-ups require that the stockholder agree that they will vote their shares in favor of the deal as well as not transfer or divest themselves of such shares.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Mergers and Acquisitions – Disclosure Matters Form 10-Q – Quarterly Reports »
Mergers and Acquisitions – Disclosure Matters
In a merger and acquisition transaction, there are three basic steps that could invoke the disclosure requirements of the federal securities laws: (i) the negotiation period or pre-definitive agreement period; (ii) the definitive agreement; and (iii) closing.
Generally speaking, the federal securities laws do not require the disclosure of a potential merger or acquisition until such time as the transaction has been reduced to a definitive agreement. Companies and individuals with information regarding non-public merger or acquisition transactions should be mindful of the rules and regulations preventing insider trading on such information. However, there are at least three cases when pre-definitive agreement disclosure may be necessary or mandated.
Item 303 of Regulation S-K which governs the disclosure requirement for Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations requires, as part of this disclosure that the registrant identify any known trends or any known demands, commitments, events or uncertainties that will result in or that are reasonably likely to result in the registrant’s liquidity increasing or decreasing in any material way. Further, descriptions of known material trends in the registrant’s capital resources and expected changes in the mix and cost of such resources are required.
Disclosure of known trends or uncertainties that the registrant reasonably expects will have a material impact on net sales, revenues, or income from continuing operations is also required. Finally, the Instructions to Item 303 state that MD&A “shall focus specifically on material events and uncertainties known to management that would cause reported financial information not to be necessarily indicative of future operating results or of future financial condition.”
At first read it would seem clear that a potential merger or acquisition would fit firmly within the required MD&A discussion. However, realizing that disclosure of such negotiations and inclusion of such information could, and often would, jeopardize completing the transaction at all, the SEC has provided guidance. In SEC Release No. 33-6835 (1989) the SEC eliminated uncertainty regarding disclosure of preliminary merger negotiations by confirming that it did not intend for Item 303 to apply, and has not applied, and does not apply to preliminary merger negotiations. In general, the SEC’s recognition that companies have an interest in preserving the confidentiality of such negotiations is clearest in the context of a company’s continuous reporting obligations under the Exchange Act, where disclosure on Form 8-K of acquisitions or dispositions of assets not in the ordinary course of business is triggered by completion of the transaction (more on this below). Clearly, this is a perfect example and illustration of the importance of having competent legal counsel assist in interpreting and unraveling the numerous and complicated securities laws disclosure requirements.
In contrast, when a company registers securities for sale under the Securities Act, the SEC requires disclosure of material probable acquisitions and dispositions of businesses, including the financial statements of the business to be acquired or sold. Where the proceeds from the sale of the securities being registered are to be used to finance an acquisition of a business, the registration statement must disclose the intended use of proceeds.
Again, accommodating the need for confidentiality of negotiations, registrants are specifically permitted not to disclose in registration statements the identity of the parties and the nature of the business sought if the acquisition is not yet probable and the board of directors determines that the acquisition would be jeopardized. Although beyond the scope of this blog, many merger and/or acquisition transactions require registration under Form S-4.
Accordingly, when disclosure is not otherwise required, and has not otherwise been made, the MD&A need not contain a discussion of the impact of such negotiations where, in the company’s view, inclusion of such information would jeopardize completion of the transaction. Where disclosure is otherwise required or has otherwise been made by or on behalf of the company, the interests in avoiding premature disclosure no longer exist. In such case, the negotiations would be subject to the same disclosure standards under Item 303 as any other known trend, demand, commitment, event or uncertainty.
Yes, this is in the correct category, the material definitive agreement referred to here is a letter of intent or confidentiality agreement. Item 1.01 of Form 8-K requires a company to disclose the entry into a material definitive agreement outside of the ordinary course of business. A “material definitive agreement” is defined as “an agreement that provides for obligations that are material to and enforceable against the registrant or rights that are material to the registrant and enforceable by the registrant against one or more other parties to the agreement, in each case whether or not subject to conditions.”
Agreements relating to a merger and acquisition are outside the ordinary course of business. Moreover, although most letters of intent are non-binding by their terms, many include certain binding provisions such as confidentiality provisions, non-compete or non-circumvent provisions, no-shop and exclusivity provisions, due diligence provisions, break up fees and the like. On its face, it appears that a letter of intent would fall within the disclosure requirements in Item 1.01.
Once again, the SEC has offered interpretative guidance. In its final rule release no. 33-8400, the SEC recognizing that disclosure of letters of intent could result in destroying the underlying transaction, as well as create unnecessary market speculation, specifically eliminated the requirement that non-binding letters of intent be disclosed. Moreover, the SEC has taken the position that the binding provisions of the letter, such as non-disclosure and confidentiality are not necessarily “material” and thus do not require disclosure. However, it is important that legal counsel assist the company in drafting the letter, or in interpreting an existing letter to determine if the binding provisions reach the “materiality” standard and thus become reportable. For example, generally large break-up fees or extra-ordinary exclusivity provisions are reportable.
Regulation FD or Fair Disclosure prevents selective disclosure of non-public information. Originally Regulation FD was enacted to prevent companies from selectively providing information to fund managers, big brokerage firms and other “large players” in advance of providing the same information to the investment public at large. Regulation FD requires that in the event of an unintentional selective disclosure of insider information, the company take measures to immediately make the disclosure to the public at large through both a Form 8-K and press release.
The definitive agreement is disclosable in all aspects. In addition to inclusion in Form 10-Q and 10-K, a definitive agreement must be disclosed in Form 8-K within four (4) days of signing in accordance with Item 1.01 as described above. Moreover, following the entry of a definitive agreement, completion of conditions, such as a shareholder vote, will require in-depth disclosures regarding the potential target company, including their financial statements.
The Closing is disclosable in all aspects as is the definitive agreement. Moreover, in addition to item 1.01, the Closing may require disclosures under several or even most of the Items in Form 8-K. Such as Item 2.01 – Completion of disposal or acquisition of Assets; Item 3.02 – Unregistered sale of securities; Item 4.01 – Changes in Certifying Accountant; Item 5.01 Change in Control, etc…
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Mergers and Acquisitions
Mergers and AcquisitionsConfidentiality, Non-Disclosure Agreements
A confidentiality agreement or non-disclosure agreement (“NDA”) is an agreement among the parties to a proposed transaction to keep information secret and in confidence. In the context of a merger and acquisition transaction, NDA’s are important for both the target and acquiring entities. It is critical that an NDA be signed prior to the exchange of any due diligence or embarking upon substantive transaction negotiations.
Protecting Trade Secrets
Generally in a merger and acquisition transaction, the target entity is a closely held private corporation. Accordingly it is critical for the target company to maintain the confidential nature of both its business information, and the fact that it is considering a going public transaction. During the due diligence process, the public acquiring company will be given access to non-public trade secrets, technology, business processes, customer lists, and material information regarding shareholders, debt and equity financing and financial statements.
Loose Lips Sink Ships
If this information were made public or used for any purpose other than to evaluate a potential business transaction, it could materially and adversely affect the value of the target company. Moreover, if a transaction doesn’t go through, a potential acquirer could misuse the information to compete with, or solicit customers or employees from the target company, without the protection of a NDA. Just the knowledge that a transaction is being considered could affect the target’s relationship with its current customers, suppliers and/or employees.
Generally, the public acquiring entity is subject to the disclosure requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and its information is already publicly available. However an NDA is still important to protect the public company. That is, if it became publicly known that acquirer was focusing on a particular target, other potential buyers may come to the table to compete.
Shielding Corporate Reputation, Controlling Rumors
Moreover, the acquirer’s business strategy regarding that particular acquisition would become publicly known prior to being legally required. If the acquirer changes its mind and the information was already public, investors may wonder as to why the transaction evaporated and subsequently lose confidence in both entities. An NDA can help protect against unnecessary market rumors and conjecture and potential exposure to insider trading liability. Obviously, an NDA should contain a strong obligation on the part of both parties to keep review information confidential.
Typically an NDA will permit the parties to disclose the information to its affiliates, advisors and key management on a “need to know” basis provided that each information recipient agree to the terms of the NDA.
Limitations of Non-Disclosure Agreements
An NDA only covers confidential information. That is, excluded is information that (i) is already in the possession of the recipient; or (ii) is or becomes available to the public (other than by a breach of the NDA). A properly drafted NDA will provide for procedures in the event a party is compelled, via subpoena or otherwise, to disclose information. Generally, the NDA will provide for an opportunity to learn of and fight the compelling document prior to disclosure.
Lastly, most NDA’s contain some sort of standstill or no shop provision. That is prior to expending time, money, attorney’s fees, other professional fees, etc., the parties will want assurance that the deal is not being shopped around for at least some period of time.
The Author
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Reverse Mergers, Acquisitions and Due Diligence Mergers and Acquisitions – Disclosure Matters »
Reverse Mergers, Acquisitions and Due Diligence
Due diligence refers to the legal, business and financial investigation of a business prior to entering into a reverse merger transaction. Although the due diligence process can vary depending on the nature of a transaction (a relatively small acquisition vs. a going public reverse merger)it is arguably the most important component of a transaction (or at least equal with documentation).
Reverse Mergers and Public Shells
In a reverse merger transaction involving a public shell acquiring a private operating business, the bulk of the due diligence will be by the acquiring shell on the target. Although some due diligence is also necessary on the public shell, as a Company subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act of 1934, most, if not all, pertinent information is publicly available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) EDGAR database. In the case where the public shell is a non-reporting entity, both sides to the transaction will need to complete extensive, in-depth due diligence on each other.
Analyzing Private Companies Going Public
This article focuses on due diligence by the public acquirer on the private target. At the outset, in addition to requesting copies of corporate records and documents, all contracts, asset chain of title documents, financial statements and the like, the securities attorney for the public acquirer should make themselves familiar with the target’s business, including an understanding of how they make money, what assets are important in revenues, who are their commercial partners and suppliers, and common off balance sheet and other hidden arrangements in that business. It is important to have a basic understanding of the business in order to effectively review the documents and information once supplied, to know what to ask for and to isolate potential future problems.
Addressing Post Closing Issues
In addition to determining whether the transaction as a whole is worth pursuing, proper due diligence will help in structuring the reverse merger transaction and preparing the proper documentation to prevent post closing issues (such as making sure all assignments of contracts are complete, or where an assignment isn’t possible, new contracts are prepared).
Public Records Search
In addition to creating due diligence lists of documents and information to be supplied, counsel for the public acquirer should perform separate checks for publicly available information. In today’s internet world, this part of the process has become dramatically easier. SEC legal counsel should be careful not to miss the basics, such as UCC lien searches, judgment searches, recorded property title and regulatory issues with any of the principals or participants involved in the deal.
The Author
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Reverse Merger Attorneys Mergers and AcquisitionsConfidentiality, Non-Disclosure Agreements »
A confidentiality agreement or non-disclosure agreement (“NDA”) is an agreement among the parties to a proposed transaction to keep information secret and in confidence. In the context of a merger and acquisition transaction, NDA’s are important for both the target and acquiring entities. It is critical that an NDA be signed prior to the exchange of any due diligence or embarking upon substantive transaction negotiations.
Generally in a merger and acquisition transaction, the target entity is a closely held private corporation. Accordingly it is critical for the target company to maintain the confidential nature of both its business information, and the fact that it is considering a going public transaction. During the due diligence process, the public acquiring company will be given access to non-public trade secrets, technology, business processes, customer lists, and material information regarding shareholders, debt and equity financing and financial statements.
If this information were made public or used for any purpose other than to evaluate a potential business transaction, it could materially and adversely affect the value of the target company. Moreover, if a transaction doesn’t go through, a potential acquirer could misuse the information to compete with, or solicit customers or employees from the target company, without the protection of a NDA. Just the knowledge that a transaction is being considered could affect the target’s relationship with its current customers, suppliers and/or employees.
Generally, the public acquiring entity is subject to the disclosure requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and its information is already publicly available. However an NDA is still important to protect the public company. That is, if it became publicly known that acquirer was focusing on a particular target, other potential buyers may come to the table to compete.
Moreover, the acquirer’s business strategy regarding that particular acquisition would become publicly known prior to being legally required. If the acquirer changes its mind and the information was already public, investors may wonder as to why the transaction evaporated and subsequently lose confidence in both entities. An NDA can help protect against unnecessary market rumors and conjecture and potential exposure to insider trading liability. Obviously, an NDA should contain a strong obligation on the part of both parties to keep review information confidential.
Typically an NDA will permit the parties to disclose the information to its affiliates, advisors and key management on a “need to know” basis provided that each information recipient agree to the terms of the NDA.
An NDA only covers confidential information. That is, excluded is information that (i) is already in the possession of the recipient; or (ii) is or becomes available to the public (other than by a breach of the NDA). A properly drafted NDA will provide for procedures in the event a party is compelled, via subpoena or otherwise, to disclose information. Generally, the NDA will provide for an opportunity to learn of and fight the compelling document prior to disclosure.
Lastly, most NDA’s contain some sort of standstill or no shop provision. That is prior to expending time, money, attorney’s fees, other professional fees, etc., the parties will want assurance that the deal is not being shopped around for at least some period of time.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Reverse Mergers, Acquisitions and Due Diligence Mergers and Acquisitions – Disclosure Matters »
Reverse Mergers, Acquisitions and Due Diligence
Due diligence refers to the legal, business and financial investigation of a business prior to entering into a reverse merger transaction. Although the due diligence process can vary depending on the nature of a transaction (a relatively small acquisition vs. a going public reverse merger)it is arguably the most important component of a transaction (or at least equal with documentation).
In a reverse merger transaction involving a public shell acquiring a private operating business, the bulk of the due diligence will be by the acquiring shell on the target. Although some due diligence is also necessary on the public shell, as a Company subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act of 1934, most, if not all, pertinent information is publicly available on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) EDGAR database. In the case where the public shell is a non-reporting entity, both sides to the transaction will need to complete extensive, in-depth due diligence on each other.
This article focuses on due diligence by the public acquirer on the private target. At the outset, in addition to requesting copies of corporate records and documents, all contracts, asset chain of title documents, financial statements and the like, the securities attorney for the public acquirer should make themselves familiar with the target’s business, including an understanding of how they make money, what assets are important in revenues, who are their commercial partners and suppliers, and common off balance sheet and other hidden arrangements in that business. It is important to have a basic understanding of the business in order to effectively review the documents and information once supplied, to know what to ask for and to isolate potential future problems.
In addition to determining whether the transaction as a whole is worth pursuing, proper due diligence will help in structuring the reverse merger transaction and preparing the proper documentation to prevent post closing issues (such as making sure all assignments of contracts are complete, or where an assignment isn’t possible, new contracts are prepared).
In addition to creating due diligence lists of documents and information to be supplied, counsel for the public acquirer should perform separate checks for publicly available information. In today’s internet world, this part of the process has become dramatically easier. SEC legal counsel should be careful not to miss the basics, such as UCC lien searches, judgment searches, recorded property title and regulatory issues with any of the principals or participants involved in the deal.
Attorney Laura Anthony,
Founding Partner, Legal & Compliance, LLC
Securities, Reverse Mergers, Corporate Transactions
Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size public Companies as well as private Companies intending to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB), now known as the OTCQB. For more than a decade Ms. Anthony has dedicated her securities law practice towards being “the big firm alternative.” Clients receive fast and efficient cutting-edge legal service without the inherent delays and unnecessary expense of “partner-heavy” securities law firms.
Ms. Anthony’s focus includes but is not limited to compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (“Exchange Act”) including Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K and the proxy requirements of Section 14. In addition, Ms. Anthony prepares private placement memorandums, registration statements under both the Exchange Act and Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). Moreover, Ms. Anthony represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including preparation of deal documents such as Merger Agreements, Stock Purchase Agreements, Asset Purchase Agreements and Reorganization Agreements. Ms. Anthony prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of the Exchange Act, state law and FINRA for corporate changes such as name changes, reverse and forward splits and change of domicile.
Contact Legal & Compliance LLC for a free initial consultation or second opinion on an existing matter.
« Reverse Merger Attorneys Mergers and Acquisitions