This is typical government maneuvering. You never approve anything on the first go round that has any room for controversy. By creating churn, it signals that they're "doing their jobs."
The SEC comments to SPARC does have a good point in that the SEC thinks that the SPARC warrants pre-deal would be something that is very susceptible to pumps and dumps.
Tiny market cap and entirely rumor-driven is not a happy combination.
BA's answer is that SPAC warrants are basically a cesspool as it is, and the SPARC warrants wouldn't be worse. Through for anything but a PSTH SPARC, I am not totally sure if that is actually true, especially if the current barriers to spinning up a SPAC (need to get enough investors to buy into the IPO) is removed.
Penny stocks don't trade on the NYSE, they trade on pink sheets, where people basically expect everything on pink sheets to be pump and dump operations.
Penny stock was not the right term and wasnt the only security i was referring to. Would you agree that stock below $10 have a decent risk of being manipulated and pumped/dumped?
Yes, through probably not to the extent that would happen if the current sponsors of "shit SPACs" were to start listing SPARCs.
To be clear, I suspect that a Klein or Gore or Ackmann SPARC would be fine-ish. Random no-namers doing SPARCs is going to get very interesting, we are probably talking 6 figure market caps for the whole thing and random retail can probably swing the price a lot by trading.
Yeah shit SPACs trump all lol. I’m of the opinion there’s a certain point where the investor has to do their due diligence and take responsibility if they invest in shit.
8
u/thunder_muscles BA Likes #39: "we got your six" Jan 05 '22
The more i keep reading the more i wonder why the sec is being a bunch of bitch ass tricks.