dss19552002
52 minutes ago
At minimum, saying millions of shares purchased by insiders is an exaggeration. There are more than 1 million shares owned by insiders, though to get over 1 million shares totally owned, I think they needed the stock grants, though I haven't sat through all the form 4's to break it down. Not sure if it's worth that much work, though the data is there. The picture of the sedan has never been associated with Lordstown (RIDE), though it did have an association with Foxconn, before the pictured model was abandoned. The pictured van (though the video calls it a truck) looks like it had an association with Lordstown (RIDE), but not any more. The mixing of old outdated and no longer applicable data and blind optimism is interesting. I think some of the posting is to get a reaction, and some of it is cheerleading.
So, yes, they are lies, but some of it is exaggeration. That can get people into trouble, as I've seen people in work circumstances promising Gigabytes worth of data when there were only (and only could be) megabytes of data. That led to the inevitable "Where's the rest of it" conversation which went out of control quickly. So, exaggerated claims can be just as damaging or untrue as outright lies.
The van and "sudan" stories are outright lies, though the "van" may have been somewhat true 3 years ago. So, I don't know if this is a case where he or she actually believes what he/she posts, as there certainly is some of that with the form 4 discussion I had over the stock grants, but I agree, there is more to it than that. Honestly, while I appreciate the thinking that Nu Ride may mean a newer version of RIDE (LMC), it might just be a homage to the name and they may wind up become a REIT or something like that. I have no idea what they will do, their office isn't even located in Ohio anymore, as near as I can tell: M3 Partners; 1700 Broadway, 19th Floor; New York, NY 10019.
dss19552002
10 hours ago
The van picture you have is not an asset, not a tangible asset:
https://www.reddit.com/r/lordstownmotors/comments/19a3dp0/20240108_landx_van_final/
Play the video. It's LandX, not Lordstown and not NuRide.
As far as the Sedan (you keep confusing this with the county, so wherever you are cutting and pasting this from, you should edit that), that doesn't appear to be Nu Ride's either. It looks like a Foxconn product and not Lordstown, and thus not Nu Ride:
cc.tvbs.com.tw/2017program/cars/images/uploads/2022/10/07165252/221009%E5%AF%8C%E5%A3%AB%E5%BA%B7%E5%8E%9F%E5%9E%8B%E8%BB%8A%EF%BC%BF001-1024x576.jpg- look at the web address, it's not even the USA!
Upon further research, the sedan appears to be the Indie EV, I think. It is a Foxconn vehicle, but it was once part of Indie EV as a company, which has folded, as I understand it. A quick look at the Internet shows that the sedan's production has been cancelled. Without doing a deeper dive, this is what I have on this sedan.
dss19552002
4 days ago
I'm sorry, but the 10 million in $&D is from 2023. This is 2024. I never said the vehicles in your posts were from Tesla, if you were referring to me. Either way, the van (or Truck as it is actually identified in the video you refer to) is not a Lordstown property. Fact. It belongs to LandX. The sedan you have pictured is not Lordstown either, nor is it LandX. It's a discontinued product. Do your research. SMH.
You do realize the Nu Ride is a shell? It's in the filings. That R&D is for products that LandX bought. So, Lordstown spent that $10 million to develop LandX products, essentially. Lordstown doesn't own and is not developing any EV. You know that for a fact, 100%.
However, I'll take this message as just an attempt to get a reaction and not a serious post. So, congratulations. You got my response which took your post seriously, though I am now thinking it isn't a post to be taken seriously. Too many wrong facts from someone who says they read the filings.
dss19552002
4 days ago
First, I've already debunked the video and the picture. The sedan you posted has zero to do with Nu Ride. I've proven that. Same with the video of the van or truck. Nothing to do with Nu Ride. You might as well post a picture of the Tesla truck, which is already on the road.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174447351
Second, how will Nu Ride change the world? They aren't even an EV company yet. Also, in the EV world, Tesla can make that claim, Nu Ride, even if it becomes an EV maker (which there isn't a good reason to believe), won't be in that position, even if they wind up being bigger than GM. So, this is just posturing and a pumper-like statement, though if you believe in the idea, I can accept it as cheerleading and excitement.
Third, there is no evidence of a merger with LandX. There will not be one as long as Burns is in the picture. Why would he want to merge with Nu Ride? He'd be better off probably with a new SPAC, like Diamond Peak was when they merged with Lordstown. Even at that, Burns couldn't do it anyway, so I think he's happy having a private EV company at the moment. As with the link above, the sedan was a failure for that company, the sedan you posted a picture of. The truck or van as you may call it is a LandX property. I'm sure LandX would want much more than $10.2 million they paid for the assets of the old Lordstown Motors. I would also read the SEC rulings on this issue. It will help you understand the reasons I say this.
So, in conclusion, the merger with LandX is just hype by an individual investor who wants it to be true, but has ZERO evidence for it. That's fine, that's what it is, and I get that posters do that on these types of message boards. I also get the Nu Ride Inc. name idea that you have latched onto. But, it could be as simple as the old ticker was RIDE, and this is a new company from the "ashes" of Lordstown Motors, RIDE, so this is now a new company and they took for the name the old ticker. It might not be anything more than that, just borrowing the old ticker to say they are a new company from that ticker. Nu verses New is kind of cute, I guess. You've provided no evidence to suggest otherwise. But, in your defense, the company is looking for a merger candidate, either to buyout a private company and go public with that or merge with another public company. So, the merger idea is not out of the question, and worth being on the lookout for. I do think, at the moment, a merger with LandX is out of the question for a variety of reasons.
Good luck.
dss19552002
6 days ago
So, you are saying this is just a rumor? Not a very plausible one. LandX will not likely merge with Nu Ride, and Burns will not be an officer at Nu Ride unless Nu Ride goes private. Why would LandX merge with Nu Ride? If they are looking for a reverse merger, there are other shells, or they could do a SPAC. They could even do an IPO, I suppose. What does Nu Ride have to offer them?
Diamond Peak? Isn't that old news from 2020? What RIDE used to be before it was RIDE.
Omnibus hearing is July 11, I think.
Saving Grace
2 weeks ago
OK, you're right, Andrew Sole's 1.2 million purchase was a cash purchase but the other directors were in fact grants. My mistake, after doing the math. You nailed it. Thanks for clearing that up. Peace <
This is not a stock purchase, but a grant. Look at the form 4. They acquired 52,747 shares. The closing price on May 13 was $1.82. Let's see, $1.82 times 52,747 is $95,999.54. That's the stock grant that they received, which vests quarterly. By some amazing coincidence, that's what the Form 4 says! The $95,999.54 matches up with the $96 000 from the 8-K as well. So, far, this company is being transparent.
dss19552002
2 weeks ago
What are you talking about?
From your quote of the filing:
a three-year grant under the Company's 2020 Equity Compensation Plan of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) with a fair
market value of $8,000 per quarter ($96,000 in the aggregate), based on the closing price per share of the Company’s common stock on May 13, 2024.
This is not a stock purchase, but a grant. Look at the form 4. They acquired 52,747 shares. The closing price on May 13 was $1.82. Let's see, $1.82 times 52,747 is $95,999.54. That's the stock grant that they received, which vests quarterly. By some amazing coincidence, that's what the Form 4 says! The $95,999.54 matches up with the $96 000 from the 8-K as well. So, far, this company is being transparent.
The board already gets $12,000 cash per quarter and can do whatever they want with it.
I don't disagree with that. However, they didn't use that $12,000 to buy stock.
You also said They Bought undisclosed amount, allowed to acquire.
I disagree with that. The Form 4 doesn't say that they purchased an undisclosed amount. The way form 4's work is that insiders report their buying and selling. It isn't a secret. The form 4s report what they currently own, direct and indirect. Look at Sole's Form 4, it shows both the 52,747 restricted stock unit grant (which is what all these form 4s were about - NOT stock purchases) and the shares he bought back in March, which are 700,000. All their acquisitions are disclosed. They even reported when they became directors that they didn't own any stock in the company by filing their Form 3s.
So, yes, I read the May 16 filing, the 8-K. You quoted it. It does mark a fairly significant change from the March 15 8-K in 1) the cash compensation, being now paid in advance rather than areas. The specifics of the stock based compensation changed also from the March 8-K in that it was more specific as to the date which the pricing was determined for the stock compensation and how it was to be distributed.
So, again, I'm not sure where you disagreed with me based on the filings. So, Read the filings. SMH.
Saving Grace
2 weeks ago
They Bought undisclosed amount, allowed to acquire. The board already gets $12,000 cash per quarter and can do whatever they want with it. Read the filing. SMH
Following a review by, and upon the recommendation of, the Compenation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Nu Ride Inc. (the
“Company”), on May 13, 2024, the Board adopted a modified director compensation plan that includes the payment of cash and equity consideration to outside
directors for service on the Board. Accordingly, each director will receive (i) a quarterly cash stipend of $12,000, which will be paid in advance on or about the
first day of each calendar quarter, and (ii) a three-year grant under the Company's 2020 Equity Compensation Plan of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) with a fair
market value of $8,000 per quarter ($96,000 in the aggregate), based on the closing price per share of the Company’s common stock on May 13, 2024. The
RSUs granted cover service on the Board through the first quarter of 2027 and vest quarterly through January 30, 2027, subject to acceleration on the
occurrence of certain events. The amount of quarterly director compensation of $12,000 cash and $8,000 equity remains the same as previously approved by
the Board and disclosed in the Company’s Form 8-K filed on March 15, 2024, but the cash portion will be paid in advance rather than in arrears and the equity
portion consists of a single grant of RSUs for up to twelve quarters of service rather than as quarterly issuances of shares of common stock
dss19552002
2 weeks ago
Michael Wartell was not a stock purchase, but an acquisition: Represents a restricted stock unit award that vests in quarterly increments through January 30, 2027. Each restricted stock unit represents a contingent right to receive one share of the Issuer's common stock.
Alexandre Zyngier was not a stock purchase, essentially the same as Michael Wartell's.
The same for Andrew Sole's March 15 acquisition. The same as the above 2 acquisitions.
Alexander Matina also had the same number of shares acquired the same way.
The same is true for Neil Weiner.
So, in short, these 5 insider transactions were not stock purchases, but acquisitions.
Box 4, as you pointed out in an earlier post is A for acquisition vs D for disposition. That could be a purchase or some other acquisition.
Box 3 has the code of A, which is not a purchase, but an acquisition. I'll report the quote for note 1 on Neil Weiner's form 4:
Represents a restricted stock unit award that vests in quarterly increments through January 30, 2027. Each restricted stock unit represents a contingent right to receive one share of the Issuer's common stock
All of these seem to be direct ownership for even Andrew Sole (Box 6 ownership form) whose other shares are indirect. True with a couple of others as well.
So, no director bought large on May 15th. But 5 directors did receive stock on May 15th. These transactions look like, unless I am mistaken, stock-based compensation and not purchases, but these do not vest immediately. They all received 52,747 shares (or share equivalents - units as reported on Form 4).
Don't mistake what I am saying, I'm not making a bearish statement here, it's just not as bullish as an actual stock purchase. There is still incentive to perform, and thus incentive for the stock price to improve, so this isn't negative.
While this isn't a complete list, here is part of the section for the Form 4 instructions:
8. Transaction Codes
Use the codes listed below to indicate in Table I, Column 3 and Table II, Column 4 the character of the transaction reported.
Use the code that most appropriately describes the transaction. If the transaction is not specifically listed, use transaction
Code “J” and describe the nature of the transaction in the space for explanation of responses. If a transaction is voluntarily
reported earlier than required, place “V” in the appropriate column to so indicate; otherwise, the column should be left blank.
If a transaction involves an equity swap or instrument with similar characteristics, use transaction code “K” in addition to
the code(s) that most appropriately describes the transaction, e.g., “S/K” or “P/K.”
General Transaction Codes
P — Open market or private purchase of non-derivative or derivative security
S — Open market or private sale of non-derivative or derivative security
V — Transaction voluntarily reported earlier than required
Rule 16b-3 Transaction Codes
A — Grant, award or other acquisition pursuant to Rule 16b-3(d)
D — Disposition to the issuer of issuer equity securities pursuant to Rule 16b-3(e)
F — Payment of exercise price or tax liability by delivering or withholding securities incident to the receipt, exercise
or vesting of a security issued in accordance with Rule 16b-3
I — Discretionary transaction in accordance with Rule 16b-3(f) resulting in acquisition or disposition of issuer
securities
M — Exercise or conversion of derivative security exempted pursuant to Rule 16b-3
This is not the complete list, but should be helpful for box 3 of form 4.
dss19552002
2 weeks ago
From my reading of the lawyer's website, there is no timeline at the moment:
https://www.kccllc.net/lordstown
However, the chapter 11 litigation is largely done, as if you look at the court docket, there are mostly final applications.
The big question is the adversarial lawsuit against Foxconn. That is also visible on this webpage under adversary case proceedings. The last item there is from December 2023 for the motion by Foxconn to dismiss, which hasn't been ruled on yet. I think this will be settled, which might be why the court hasn't yet ruled. However, I don't really know that. The court case could go on for a long time if they don't settle, and I mean possible a year or two.
Based on insider buying, which really hasn't happened since March (the May filings have been stock grants or something like that from what I saw), I can see how you might think this is a good buy. I don't think that's as strong of a signal as you might, but it's a reasonable position. It's also reasonable to expect that they will get some cash from the Foxconn lawsuit, though I don't think billions. So, I can see that being a reasonable reason to play this, at least as some sort of lotto ticket. The litigation may take years, so I don't think this is a short-term play on that basis, but it's fair.
Either way, they do have cash, so they can do something with it, whether it's investing in EVs or some other business, or if they are a reverse merger target for something. It's a lot of hope and ifs for an investment, but as a lotto play, I can certainly see it. To me, your position seems reasonable for investing in this shell. I wish you luck.
Trade smarter, not harder: Unleash your inner pro with our toolkit and live discussions.
JoshTaeger
2 hours ago
1vman
13 hours ago
Hot Features
Premium
