Saturday , February 23 2019
Home / canada / Aphria claims it will provide a disputed line-by-line charge

Aphria claims it will provide a disputed line-by-line charge

Vic Neufeld, CEO of Aphria, one of the largest Canadian marijuana producers, says the company will deal with the allegations in the line-by-line short sellers report.

Tyler Anderson / National Post / Tyler Anderson / National Post

Leamington Chief Executive Officer, Aphria Cannabis Producer – under siege from sellers who claim to be enriching in the living room – said the company will publish a report next week on each charge.

Vic Neufeld said Aphria's response is rebutting the Monday indictment, which mostly focuses on recent acquisitions in Latin America.

"You will find all 20 accusations, line-by-line, point-by-point pictures – real pictures, true pictures – what we have called the acquisition of LATAM property," Neufeld said on Friday. "Each point will be very informative and deepens the real light of the story."

He said the refutation would probably be issued on Wednesday. Aphria has announced that it has elected an independent committee to review the recent acquisition of its Latin American businesses and confirm that it is on the level.

Neufeld said that Liberty Health Sciences, a company backed by Aphria, which was the target of the second round of charges, will likely issue a response on Monday.

He said the possibility of litigation prevents him from dealing with the specific details of the charge until the official reaction of next week.

"I'm not hiding," he said. "We are simply very focused on getting the truth about all the facts – those that have been published and what we will have to publish – to make sure we are not preferentially providing selective disclosure."

He said, however, that it would be "proven by other judicial legal work" that no insider was enriched at the expense of unconscious shareholders.

This was one of many accusations from Quintessential Capital Management and Hindenburg Research, a forensic analyst, focusing on Africa on Monday calling it a "shell game" and a "black hole."

Both Quintessential and Hindenburg were allegedly short selling Aphria stocks. A short-term vendor may benefit if the price of the security falls.

He claims that Aphria has diverted funds to inflated investments held by insiders, and that its recent transactions in Latin America are worthless. Hindenburg said Aphria's official headquarters, worth 145 million Jamaican acquisitions, "is an abandoned building that the bank was selling at the beginning of this year."

The company also argues that Aphria's $ 50 million acquisition by Argentina, which reached $ 11 million in 2017, reached only $ 430,000.

Hindenburg launched a second choice of attacks on Florida on Thursday, which was acquired by Liberty Health Sciences. The forensic analysis firm claims that the buyers obtained it through a newly established entity rather than just buy the property, which in six days paid the shells holder for $ 5 million. Hindenburg argues that this transaction was under the control of Neufeld.

Hindenburg also claims that "unnamed individuals bought 242 million shares of Liberty in a highly diluted private placement of $ 0.001," just days after Aphria announced a plan to buy its shares for a 208 times higher price.

The Hindenburg report also states that Neufeld paid 280,450 shares, but actually took control of more than 2.4 million shares. Neufeld said on Friday one message that it was, but it was a bug that was fixed on Thursday.

"The stock I bought, 280 450 shares, for some reason, has earned an extrapolation of more than 2.4 million, which has prompted the people of Hindenburg to get some 2.1 million shares somewhere," he said. "This is a mistake by Liberty Health Sciences and our law firm, and they have been corrected and corrected."

Neufeld said that Aphria is still "going through pros and cons" and suing those who are behind the news.

"We have to find out that at the end of every litigation we will have success in anything? What I do not want to do is wasting shareholder money and executive managerial time for something that could end up with zero realization, so we did not say no but we did not say yes . "

Source link