Market Wrap Up – November and December 2024
As promised, I am going to provide regular market wrap-ups for the IPO market as we move forward with the next administration and chapter for our U.S. capital markets. This edition covers November and December 2024. For a review of the Market Wrap-Up for October 2024 see HERE.
Nine small cap ($30,000,000 and under) IPOs priced in November 2024 and 12 in December 2024 (compared to 19 in October; 12 in September; 8 in August; 8 in July; 3 in June; 5 in May; 12 in April; 6 in March; 6 in February; and 8 in January). Below is a chart of relevant deal information for the November and December IPOs. In October I only included deals up to $25,000,000 but raised the cap to $30,000,000. Normally, I would include all deals under $50,000,000 in this category, but the deal sizes remain very low. As deal sizes return to pre 2022 normal levels, I will continue to
NASDAQ Proposes Amendment To Liquidity Listing Standard
On December 12, 2024, Nasdaq proposed an amendment to its liquidity listing standards for the Nasdaq Capital Market and Nasdaq Global Market such that the market value of unrestricted publicly held shares requirement could only be satisfied from the proceeds of the initial public offering. That is, Nasdaq would no longer count shares registered for re-sale by existing shareholders towards satisfying this listing standard. Nasdaq is also proposing to make similar changes affecting companies the uplist onto the Nasdaq from OTC Markets.
To list its securities on Nasdaq Capital Market or Nasdaq Global Market, a company is required to meet: (a) certain initial quantitative and qualitative requirements and (b) certain continuing quantitative and qualitative requirements. The quantitative listing thresholds for initial listing are generally higher than for continued listing, thus helping to ensure that companies have reached a sufficient level of maturity prior to listing. NASDAQ also requires listed companies to meet stringent corporate governance standards.
Market Wrap-Up
For the first time since December 2022, the markets are seeing an uptick in completed small cap initial public offerings (IPOs). My clients are always asking me about the deals that are getting done, which prompted this blog, the first in what will be regular periodic market roundups.
Nineteen small cap (under $25,000,000) IPOs priced in October compared to 12 in September; 8 in August; 8 in July; 3 in June; 5 in May; 12 in April; 6 in March; 6 in February; and 8 in January. Below is a chart of relevant deal information for the 19 October IPOs. Normally, I would include all deals under $50,000,000 in this category, but the deal sizes remain very low. As deal sizes return to pre 2022 normal levels, I will adjust by market recaps upward accordingly.
| Exchange | Offer Amount | Domestic/Foreign Issuer | Banker(s) |
| Nasdaq Capital | $4,199,995 | Foreign | Aegis Capital Corp. |
| Nasdaq Capital | $5,200,000 | Foreign | The Benchmark Company |
| Nasdaq Capital | $7,000,000 |
Terminating Reporting Obligations In An Abandoned IPO
It has been a tough few years for small cap (and all) initial public offerings (IPOs). Although I have been seeing a small up-tick in priced deals recently, we are not yet near the highs of 2020 – 2022. Among the various challenges facing IPO issuers, lengthy Nasdaq/NYSE review periods and trouble building out sufficient allocations have been especially difficult resulting in a lengthier IPO process than expected.
An increased IPO timeline adds significant expense to the process. A registration statement cannot go effective with stale financial statement. Financial statements for domestic issuers go stale every 135 days requiring either a new quarterly review or annual audit and an amended registration statement. Likewise, financial statements for foreign private issuers (FPIs) go stale every nine months. When an issuer is nearing the end date for financial statements, and it appears that a closing of an IPO may be imminent, they sometimes choose to go effective and rely on Rule 430A.
Definition Of A Shell Company In A Reverse Merger
Ten weeks of blogs on the new SPAC and shell company rules provides the perfect segue to discuss exactly what is a “shell company” in the context of a reverse merger and its implications – including one heartburn inducing unintended consequence. As I have been discussing over the past weeks, the new rules specifically apply to any reverse merger with a shell company, not just a SPAC shell company.
New Rule 145a deems any business combination of a reporting shell company involving another entity that is not a shell company to entail a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders. Nothing in Rule 145a would prevent or prohibit the use of a valid exemption, if available, for the deemed sale of securities; however, I know of no such available exemption and the SEC rule release not only does not suggest one but specifically clarifies that Section 3(a)(9) would not be available.
As a result, the SEC release suggests
SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 6
On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions. The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs. The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general. The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.
In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE. The second blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE. The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE. Part 4 continued a review
2022 Annual Report Of The Office Of The Advocate For Small Business Capital Formation
The Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation (“Office”) has published its Annual Report for fiscal year 2022 (“Report”). The Report is delivered to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the U.S. Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the U.S. House of Representatives directly by the Office, without review or input from the SEC at large.
Background
The SEC’s Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation launched in January 2019 after being created by Congress pursuant to the Small Business Advocate Act of 2016 (see HERE). The mission of the Office is to advocate for pragmatic solutions to accessing capital markets and business growth.
The Office has the following functions: (i) assist small businesses (privately held or public with a market cap of less than $250 million) and their investors in resolving problems with the SEC or self-regulatory organizations; (ii) identify and propose regulatory changes that would benefit small businesses
Compliance Deadlines For Nasdaq Board Diversity Rules
On August 6, 2021, the SEC approved Nasdaq’s board diversity listing standards proposal. Nasdaq Rule 5605(f) requires Nasdaq listed companies, subject to certain exceptions, to: (i) to have at least one director who self-identifies as a female, and (ii) have at least one director who self-identifies as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, Native American or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, two or more races or ethnicities, or as LGBTQ+, or (iii) explain why the company does not have at least two directors on its board who self-identify in the categories listed above. The rule changes also made headlines in most major publications. One of the most common themes in the press was the lack of inclusion of people with disabilities in the definition of an “underrepresented minority” for purposes of complying with the new rules.
The original rules had tiered compliance deadlines which Nasdaq (and practitioners) found confusing and unnecessarily complicated. On December 14,
Small-Cap IPO Volatility – The China Connection
Less than two months after the PCAOB and the China Securities Regulatory Commission and Ministry of Finance signed a Statement of Protocol reaching a tentative deal to allow the PCAOB to fully inspect and investigate registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong, Nasdaq effectively halted all small-cap IPOs with a China connection. This time, the issue is not audit-related.
During the week of September 19, one of our clients had a deal ready to be priced and begin trading on Nasdaq. We had thought we cleared all comments when a call came from our Nasdaq reviewer – all small-cap IPOs were being temporarily halted while the Exchange investigated recent volatility. The same day, an article came out on Bloomberg reporting on 2200% price swings (up and then steeply back down) on recent IPOs involving companies with ties to China – a repeat of similar volatility in the late ’80’s and early ’90’s despite three decades of
SEC Proposes New Rules For SPACs – Part 5
On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules related to SPAC and de-SPAC transactions including significantly enhanced disclosure obligations, expanding the scope of deemed public offerings in these transactions, making a target company a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination, and aligning de-SPAC transactions with initial public offering rules. In addition, the SEC has also proposed rules that would deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including but not limited to a SPAC, to involve a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders. The new rules would amend a number of financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving shell companies.
In addition to proposing new rules for SPAC and de-SPAC transactions, the SEC is proposing new Securities Act Rule 145a that would deem all business combinations with an Exchange Act reporting shell to involve the sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s
Annual Report of Office of Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation
The Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation (“Office”) issued its 2020 Annual Report and it breaks down one of the strangest years in any of our lives, into facts and figures that continue to illustrate the resilience of the U.S. capital markets. Although the report is for fiscal year end September 30, 2020, prior to much of the impact of Covid-19, the Office supplemented the Report with initial Covid-19 impact information.
Background on Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation
The SEC’s Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation launched in January 2019 after being created by Congress pursuant to the Small Business Advocate Act of 2016 (see HERE). One of the core tenants of the Office is recognizing that small businesses are job creators, generators of economic opportunity and fundamental to the growth of the country, a drum I often beat.
The Office has the following functions: (i) assist small businesses
SEC Modernizes Auditor Independence Rules
On October 16, 2020, the SEC adopted amendments to codify and modernize certain aspects of the auditor independence framework. The rule proposal was published in December 2019 (see HERE).
The current audit independence rules were created in 2000 and amended in 2003 in response to the financial crisis facilitated by the downfall of Enron, WorldCom and auditing giant Arthur Andersen, and despite evolving circumstances have remained unchanged since that time. The regulatory structure lays out governing principles and describes certain specific financial, employment, business, and non-audit service relationships that would cause an auditor not to be independent. Like most SEC rules, the auditor independence rules require an examination of all relevant facts and circumstances. Under Rule 2-01(b), an auditor is not independent if that auditor, in light of all facts and circumstances, could not reasonably be capable of exercising objective and impartial judgment on all issues encompassed within the audit duties. Rule 2-01(c) provides a non-exclusive list
NYSE Continues To Struggle With Direct Listing Rule Changes
Late last year, around the same time that the SEC approved Nasdaq rule changes related to direct listings on the Nasdaq Global Market and Nasdaq Capital Market (see HERE), the SEC rejected proposed amendments by the NYSE big board which would allow a company to issue new shares and directly raise capital in conjunction with a direct listing process. Nasdaq had previously updated its direct listing rules for listing on the Market Global Select Market (see HERE).
The NYSE did not give up and in August of this year, after two more proposed amendments, the SEC finally approved new NYSE direct listing rules that allow companies to sell newly issued primary shares on its own behalf into the opening trade in a direct listing process. However, after receiving a notice of intent to petition to prevent the rule change, the SEC has stayed the approval until further notice. Still pushing forward, on September 4, the NYSE filed
SEC Proposes Additional Disclosures For Resource Extraction Companies
In December 2019, the SEC proposed rules that would require resource extraction companies to disclose payments made to foreign governments or the U.S. federal government for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. The proposed rules have an interesting history. In 2012 the SEC adopted similar disclosure rules that were ultimately vacated by the U.S. District Court. In 2016 the SEC adopted new rules which were disapproved by a joint resolution of Congress. However, the statutory mandate in the Dodd-Frank Act requiring the SEC to adopt these rules requiring the disclosure remains in place and as such, the SEC is now taking its third pass at it.
The proposed rules would require domestic and foreign resource extraction companies to file a Form SD on an annual basis that includes information about payments related to the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals that are made to a foreign government or the U.S. federal government.
Proposed Rule
Nasdaq Extends Direct Listings
The Nasdaq Stock Market currently has three tiers of listed companies: (1) The Nasdaq Global Select Market, (2) The Nasdaq Global Market, and (3) The Nasdaq Capital Market. Each tier has increasingly higher listing standards, with the Nasdaq Global Select Market having the highest initial listing standards and the Nasdaq Capital Markets being the entry-level tier for most micro- and small-cap issuers. For a review of the Nasdaq Capital Market listing requirements, see HERE as supplemented and amended HERE.
On December 3, 2019, the SEC approved amendments to the Nasdaq rules related to direct listings on the Nasdaq Global Market and Nasdaq Capital Market. As previously reported, on February 15, 2019, Nasdaq amended its direct listing process rules for listing on the Market Global Select Market (see HERE).
Interestingly, around the same time as the approval of the Nasdaq rule changes, the SEC rejected amendments proposed by the NYSE big board which would have allowed
Division of Enforcement 2019 Annual Report
As my firm does not practice in the enforcement arena, it is not an area I always write about, but this year I found a few trends that are interesting. In particular, just by following published enforcement matters on the SEC’s website, I’ve noticed a large uptick in actions to suspend the trading in, or otherwise take action against, micro- and small-cap companies, especially delinquent filers. I’ve also noticed a large uptick of actions against smaller public and private companies that use misleading means to raise capital from retail investors, and the concurrent use of unlicensed broker-dealers. Of course, there have always been a significant number of actions involving cryptocurrencies. In light of my own observations, I decided to review and report on the SEC’s view of its actions.
As an aside, before discussing the report, I note that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has raised concerns about the quality of record keeping and documentation maintained by the
An IPO Without The SEC
On January 23, 2019, biotechnology company Gossamer Bio, Inc., filed an amended S-1 pricing its $230 million initial public offering, taking advantage of a rarely used SEC Rule that will allow the S-1 to go effective, and the IPO to be completed, 20 days from filing, without action by the SEC. Since the government shutdown, several companies have opted to proceed with the effectiveness of a registration statement for a follow-on offering without SEC review or approval, but this marks the first full IPO, and certainly the first of any significant size. The Gossamer IPO is being underwritten by Bank of America Merrill Lynch, SVB Leerink, Barclays and Evercore ISI. On January 24, 2019, Nasdaq issued five FAQ addressing their position on listing companies utilizing Section 8(a). Although the SEC has recommenced full operations as of today, there has non-the-less been a transformation in the methods used to access capital markets, and the use of 8(a) is just
Proposed SPAC Rule Changes
With the growing popularity of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), both the Nasdaq and NYSE have proposed rule changes that would make listings easier, although on June 1, 2018, the Nasdaq withdrew its proposal. SPACs raised more money last year than any year since the financial crisis. The SEC has been delaying action on the proposed rule changes, now pushing off a decision until at least August 2018.
A company that registers securities as a blank check company and whose securities are deemed a “penny stock” must comply with Rule 419 and thus are not eligible to trade. A brief discussion of Rule 419 is below. A “penny stock” is defined in Rule 3a51-1 of the Exchange Act and like many definitions in the securities laws, is inclusive of all securities other than those that satisfy certain delineated exceptions. The most common exceptions, and those that would be applicable to penny stocks for purpose of the SPAC, include: (i)
Multiple Classes of Stock and the Public Company
In March 2017, Snap Inc. completed its IPO, selling only non-voting Class A common shares to the investing public and beginning an ongoing discussion of the viability and morality of multiple classes of stock in the public company setting. No other company has gone public with non-voting stock on a U.S. exchange. Although Facebook and Alphabet have dual-class stock structures, shareholders still have voting rights, even though insiders hold substantial control with super-voting preferred stock.
Snap’s stock price was $10.79 on May 7, 2018, well below is IPO opening price of $17.00. Certainly the decline has a lot to do with the company’s floundering app, Snapchat, which famously lost $1.3 billion in value when reality star Kylie Jenner tweeted that she no longer used the app, but the negativity associated with the share structure has made it difficult to attract institutional investors, especially those with a history of activism. Although there was a net increase of $8.8 million in
Emerging Growth Companies Will Start To Grow Up
The first of emerging growth companies (“EGC’s”) will begin losing EGC status as the five-year anniversary of the creation of an EGC has now passed. Those companies that will lose status as a result of the passage of time are almost unilaterally not pleased with the impending change and concurrent increase in regulatory compliance.
Background
Title I of the JOBS Act, initially enacted on April 5, 2012, created a new category of issuer called an “emerging growth company” (“EGC”). An EGC is defined as a company with total annual gross revenues of less than $1,070,000,000 during its most recently completed fiscal year that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. An EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which it exceeds $1,070,000,000 in revenues; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth year after its IPO (for example, if the issuer has
SEC Chair Jay Clayton Discusses Direction Of SEC
In a much talked about speech to the Economic Club of New York on July 12, 2017, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton set forth his thoughts on SEC policy, including a list of guiding principles for his tenure. Chair Clayton’s underlying theme is the furtherance of opportunities and protection of Main Street investors, a welcome viewpoint from the securities markets’ top regulator. This was Chair Clayton’s first public speech in his new role and follows Commissioner Michael Piwowar’s recent remarks to the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation largely related to the U.S. IPO market. For a summary of Commissioner Piwowar’s speech, read HERE.
Guiding Principles
Chair Clayton outlined a list of eight guiding principles for the SEC.
#1: The SEC’s Mission is its touchstone
As described by Chair Clayton, the SEC has a three part mission: (i) to protect investors; (ii) to maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets, and (iii) to facilitate capital formation. Chair Clayton stresses that it
SEC Commissioner Piwowar Speaks On The IPO Market
Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE
——————————————————————————————————
On May 16, 2017, SEC Commissioner Michael Piwowar gave the opening remarks to the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation. The focus of the SEC-NYU Dialogue was the current state of and outlook for the U.S. IPO market. Mr. Piwowar specifically spoke about reviving the U.S. IPO market.
The declining IPO market has been a topic of review lately, and was one of the main points discussed at the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee meeting held on June 22. SEC Chair Jay Clayton weighed in at the Investor Advisory Committee, stating that he is “actively exploring ways in which we can improve the attractiveness of listing on our public markets, while maintaining important investor protections.” Mr. Clayton’s words echoed his statements made to the Senate confirmation hearing prior to his swearing in as chair.
This blog summarizes Commissioner Piwowar’s speech and of course offers my views and commentary.
Commissioner Piwowar’s Opening
SEC Completes Inflation Adjustment Under Titles I And III Of The Jobs Act; Adopts Technical Amendments
On March 31, 2017, the SEC adopted several technical amendments to rules and forms under both the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to conform with Title I of the JOBS Act. On the same day, the SEC made inflationary adjustments to provisions under Title I and Title III of the JOBS Act by amending the definition of the term “emerging growth company” and the dollar amounts in Regulation Crowdfunding.
Title I of the JOBS Act, initially enacted on April 5, 2012, created a new category of issuer called an “emerging growth company” (“EGC”). The primary benefits to an EGC include scaled-down disclosure requirements both in an IPO and periodic reporting, confidential filings of registration statements, certain test-the-waters rights in IPO’s, and an ease on analyst communications and reports during the EGC IPO process. For a summary of the scaled disclosure available to an EGC as well as the differences in
Smaller Reporting Companies vs. Emerging Growth Companies
The topic of reporting requirements and distinctions between various categories of reporting companies has been prevalent over the past couple of years as regulators and industry insiders examine changes to the reporting requirements for all companies, and qualifications for the various categories of scaled disclosure requirements. As I’ve written about these developments, I have noticed inconsistencies in the treatment of smaller reporting companies and emerging growth companies in ways that are likely the result of poor drafting or unintended consequences. This blog summarizes two of these inconsistencies.
As a reminder, a smaller reporting company is currently defined as a company that has a public float of less than $75 million in common equity as of the last business day of its most recently completed second fiscal quarter, or if a public float of zero, has less than $50 million in annual revenues as of its most recently completed fiscal year-end. I note that on June 27, 2016, the SEC issued
OTC Markets Amends IPO Listing Standards for OTCQX
OTC Markets has unveiled changes to the quotations rule and standards for the OTCQX, which proposed changes are scheduled to become effective on June 13, 2016. The proposed amendments are intended to address and accommodate companies completing an IPO onto the OTCQX and which accordingly have no prior trading history. Such entities either would have a recently cleared Form 211 with FINRA or are completing the 211 application process through a market maker, at the time of their OTCQX application. The initial qualification changes apply to OTCQX Rules for U.S. Companies, U.S. Banks and International Companies.
The OTCQX previously amended its listing standards effective January 1, 2016 to increase the quantitative criteria for listing and to add additional qualitative requirements further aligning the OTCQX with a national stock exchange. To read my blog on the January 1, 2016 amendments see HERE.
The new amendments will (i) allow companies that meet the $5 bid price test to use unaudited, interim
The Fast Act (Fixing American’s Surface Transportation Act)
On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the Fixing American’s Surface Transportation Act (the “FAST Act”) into law, which included many capital markets/securities-related bills. The FAST Act is being dubbed the JOBS Act 2.0 by many industry insiders. The FAST Act has an aggressive rulemaking timetable and some of its provisions became effective immediately upon signing the bill into law on December 4, 2015.
In July 2015, the Improving Access to Capital for Emerging Growth Companies Act (the “Improving EGC Act”) was approved by the House and referred to the Senate for further action. Since that time, this Act was bundled with several other securities-related bills into a transportation bill (really!) – i.e., the FAST Act.
In addition to the Improving EGC Act, the FAST Act incorporated the following securities-related acts: (i) the Disclosure Modernization and Simplifications Act (see my blog HERE ); (ii) the SBIC Advisers Relief Act; (iii) the Reforming Access for Investments in Startup Enterprises Act; (iv)
Going Public Transactions For Smaller Companies: Direct Public Offering And Reverse Merger
Introduction
One of the largest areas of my firms practice involves going public transactions. I have written extensively on the various going public methods, including IPO/DPOs and reverse mergers. The topic never loses relevancy, and those considering a transaction always ask about the differences between, and advantages and disadvantages of, both reverse mergers and direct and initial public offerings. This blog is an updated new edition of past articles on the topic.
Over the past decade the small-cap reverse merger, initial public offering (IPO) and direct public offering (DPO) markets diminished greatly. The decline was a result of both regulatory changes and economic changes. In particular, briefly, those reasons were: (1) the recent Great Recession; (2) backlash from a series of fraud allegations, SEC enforcement actions, and trading suspensions of Chinese companies 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
SEC Advisory Committee On Small And Emerging Companies Explores Venture Exchanges, Private And Secondary Securities Trading and The NASAA Coordinated Review Program- Part I
The SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies (the “Advisory Committee”) was organized by the SEC to provide advice on SEC rules, regulations and policies regarding “its mission of protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets and facilitating capital formation” as related to “(i) capital raising by emerging privately held small businesses and publicly traded companies with less than $250 million in public market capitalization; (ii) trading in the securities of such businesses and companies; and (iii) public reporting and corporate governance requirements to which such businesses and companies are subject.”
As previously written about, on March 4, 2015, the committee met and finalized its recommendation to the SEC regarding the definition of “accredited investor.” My blog on those recommendations can be read HERE. In addition to finalizing the accredited investor definition recommendation, at the March 4 meeting the Advisory Committee listened to presentations regarding and discussed several important and timely small business initiatives.
I’ve had the
Schedule 13D and 13G Filing Requirements for Public Company Shareholders
ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100
————————————————————————————————-
A public company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 or which is subject to Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) must file reports with the SEC (“Reporting Requirements”). The underlying basis of the Reporting Requirements is to keep shareholders and the markets informed on a regular basis in a transparent manner. Reports filed with the SEC can be viewed by the public on the SEC EDGAR website. The required reports include an annual Form 10-K, quarterly Form 10Q’s and current periodic Form 8-K as well as proxy reports and certain shareholder and affiliate reporting requirements.
This blog discusses the “certain shareholder” filing requirements under Sections 13d and 13g of the Exchange Act, Regulation 13D-G beneficial ownership reporting and related Schedules 13D and 13G. This blog is a summary of the large body of rules and interpretations related to Sections 13d and 13g,
Guide to Reverse Merger Transaction
What is a reverse merger? What is the process?
A reverse merger is the most common alternative to an initial public offering (IPO) or direct public offering (DPO) for a company seeking to go public. A “reverse merger” allows a privately held company to go public by acquiring a controlling interest in, and merging with, a public operating or public shell company. The SEC defines a “shell company” as a publically traded company with (1) no or nominal operations and (2) either no or nominal assets or assets consisting solely of any amount of cash and cash equivalents.
In a reverse merger process, the private operating company shareholders exchange their shares of the private company for either new or existing shares of the public company so that
NASDAQ To Acquire Sharepost And Create The NASDAQ Private Exchange
NASDAQ acquires Sharepost
On Wednesday March 6, 2013, NASDAQ surprised the small cap and investment community when it announced it is acquiring Sharepost’s private company market place (PCMP) exchange and rebranding it the Nasdaq Private Exchange.
In December, 2011, I wrote a few blogs on PCMPs. A PCMP is a trading platform, such as SharePost or SecondMarket that provides a market place for illiquid restricted securities, such as private company securities, 144 stock, debt instruments, warrants, and the like or alternative assets. It is on a PCMP that pre-IPO Facebook, Groupon and LInkedin received their trading start. Following the IPO of these large entities, and in particular Facebook, traffic and use of PCMP sites declines, but NASDAQ clearly believes the decline is temporary, and I agree.
Private Company Market Places
Each PCMP offers a fully automated back office, documentation, escrow, transfer and settlement support. Users open trading accounts, like they would with any other broker dealer. The PCMP provider collects
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF TITLE I OF THE JOBS ACT AS RELATED TO EMERGING GROWTH COMPANIES
On April 5, 2012, President Obama signed the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) into law. The JOBS Act was passed on a bipartisan basis by overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate. The Act seeks to remove impediments to raising capital for emerging growth public companies by relaxing disclosure, governance and accounting requirements, easing the restrictions on analyst communications and analyst participation in the public offering process, and permitting companies to “test the waters” for public offerings. The following is an in-depth review of Title I of the JOBS Act related to Emerging Growth Companies.
Introduction – What is an Emerging Growth Company?
The JOBS Act created a new category of company: an “Emerging Growth Company” (EGC). An EGC is defined as a company with annual gross revenues of less than $1 billion that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. In addition, an EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier
The JOBS Act IPO On-Ramp
I’ve written extensively on the Crowdfunding Act, or Title III of the Jobs Act, and much less extensively on the other five titles of the Act. Today’s blog will focus on Title I of the Jobs Act – Reopening American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies. Several industry types have been referring to Title I as the IPO On Ramp and so will I.
The Jobs Act
The JOBS Act created a new category of companies defined as “Emerging Growth Companies” (EGC). An EGC is defined as a company with annual gross revenues of less than $1 billion that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. In addition, an EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which it exceeds $1 billion in revenues; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth year after its IPO; (iii) the date on which it
Crowdfunding 101
As I recently blogged, the President has signed the Jobs Act including the much anticipated Crowdfunding bill. Crowdfunding is a process whereby companies will be able to raise small amounts of money either directly off their own website or using intermediaries set up for the purpose. The Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (Securities Act) prohibits the sale or delivery of any security unless such security is either registered or exempt from registration. Crowdfunding will be an exemption from registration. The exemption will likely be codified as a new and separate exemption likely under Regulation D and will include an overhaul of the current general provisions of Regulation D found in Rules 501-503.
Crowdfunding Exemption Possibilities
The exemption will likely be limited to $1 million in any twelve (12) month period, or up to $2 million if the company provides certain financial disclosure such as audited financial statements. As proposed, each investor will be limited $10,000 or 10%
Big Changes Are Coming
I’ve been practicing securities law for 19 years this year (phew!) and for the first time in my career I am excited about changes, big changes, on the horizon for small businesses. I’m talking about the JOBS Act and its ground breaking crowdfunding bill which has now been signed into law.
A Whole New Exemption
Over the years I have consistently received calls from potential clients that wish to use the exemptions provided for in Regulation D to raise money for small or start up ventures. Many of these individuals believe, mistakenly, that Regulation D provides them with a method to raise money. It does not. Regulation D only lays out rules to follow to utilize an exemption from the registration requirements in the Securities Act of 1933. These rules include such items as limitations on the dollar amount raised; who you can raise money from, how you can raise money, prohibitions on advertising and solicitation, disclosure documents required,
Gunjumping Restrictions On Communications Related To IPOs
”Gunjumping” is the dissemination of information regarding the Issuer before a complete prospectus has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Communications prior, during and immediately following the filing of a registration statement are strictly regulated to prevent an Issuer from hyping the market in association with an offering. In addition, the SEC wants to ensure that investors decisions to participate in an offering are based on information that has been reviewed by the SEC and meets the disclosure standards set forth in the securities laws.
Registration Requirements for Sales
During the pre-filing period, Section 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) makes it “unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, to… offer to sell or offer to buy… any security, unless a registration statement has been filed as to such security.” An offer to sell or offer to buy are broadly defined to include every attempt or offer to dispose of a
Back To Basics – IPO Or Not To IPO?
Initial Public Offerings (IPO’s) are on the rise once again. I have potential clients calling me daily interested in going public through an IPO, most have little or no prior knowledge of the public company arena – so back to basics. An IPO is an initial public offering of securities. Prior to proceeding with an IPO, an Issuer should consider the advantages, disadvantages and alternatives.
The advantages of an IPO include:
- Access to capital
- Liquidity of stock
- Public image and prestige; and
- Ability to attract and retain better personnel
The disadvantages of an IPO include:
- Expense – both of the initial transaction and ongoing compliance;
- Public disclosure of business information – public companies are required to be transparent which can give private competitors an edge;
- Limitations on long term strategic decisions
- Civil and criminal liability of executive officers and directors; and
- Takeover danger
The alternatives to an IPO for an Issuer seeking capital include:
- A Section 4(2) and/or Regulation D
Necessity of Background Searches on Officers and Directors as Part of Due Diligence Prior to a Reverse Merger or IPO
If you are a private company looking to go public on the OTCBB, securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel. Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.
Many private companies go public either through a reverse merger with a public shell or initial public offering (IPO) process. A reverse merger allows a private company to go public by purchasing a controlling percentage of shares of a public shell company and merging the private company into the shell. An initial public offering is where the private company files a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission and once the registration statement is effective proceeds to sell stock either directly (a DPO) or more commonly through an underwriter.
It is very important that management of public shells and underwriters conduct a background check on the private company’s officers and directors prior to embarking
