Jul. 14 at 3:56 AM
Normally I ignore you but ..... you brought up Ayrton
That is why IMO you have to be very naieve to discount what might happen if a lender decides that what the company wants / needs is NOT what the investor wants.
Ayrton was bought out. Now we dont know why? But it is VERY relevant IMO. It shows that Ayrton in dealing with another company with an SPA like
$PAVM $LUCD had was sued by Genius entertainement as a predatory lender.
So that shows that in one example one of the lenders who Lishan said MULTIPLE times was supportive etc and waived covenants at the exact same time tried to ENFORCE THEM with a very similair SPA.
Ayrton folded immediately and gave up the
$200M they were owed. But Ayrton demanded it and were legally entitled to it per the SPA. It was Ayrtons desire not to go through discovery and what that might find that forced them IMO to give up
$200M. Its all in the public record.
So here is a direct example of a lender trying to destroy a company and wipe out retail.
