Confidentially Marketed Public Offerings (CMPO)
Posted by Securities Attorney Laura Anthony | July 5, 2016 Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Not surprisingly, I read the trades including all the basics, the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, The Street,The PIPEs Report, etc.  A few years ago I started seeing the term “confidentially marketed public offerings” or “CMPO” on a regular basis.  The weekly PIPEs Report breaks down offerings using a variety of metrics and in the past few years, the weekly number of completed CMPOs has grown in significance.  CMPOs count for billions of dollars in capital raised each year.

CMPO Defined

A CMPO is a type of shelf offering registered on a Form S-3 that involves speedy takedowns when market opportunities present themselves (for example, on heavy volume).  A CMPO is very flexible as each takedown is on negotiated terms with the particular investor or investor group.  In particular, an effective S-3 shelf registration statement allows for takedowns at a discount to market price and other flexibility in the parameters of the offering such as the inclusion of warrants and terms of such warrants.   A CMPO is sometimes referred to as “wall-crossed,” “pre-marketed” or “overnight” offerings.

In a typical CMPO, an underwriter confidentially markets takedowns of an effective S-3 shelf registration statement to a small number of institutional investors.  The underwriter will not disclose the name of the issuing company until the institutional investor agrees that they have a firm interest in receiving confidential information and agrees not to trade in such company’s securities until the offering is either completed or abandoned.

When an investor confirms their interest, the company and its banker will negotiate the terms of the offering with the investor(s), including amount, price (generally a discount to market price), warrant coverage and terms of such warrant coverage.  The disclosure of the name of the issuer and confidential information related to the offering is referred to as bringing the investor “over the wall.”  Once brought over the wall, the potential investor(s) will complete due diligence.  This process is completed on a confidential basis.

Once the terms have been agreed upon, the offering is “flipped” from confidential to public and a prospectus supplement, free writing prospectus, if any, a Rule 134 press release and a Form 8-K are prepared and filed informing the market of the offering.  These public documents are almost always filed after the market closes and the offering itself generally closes that night as well, though sometimes the closing occurs the next trading day.  The closing is the same as a firm commitment underwritten offering, such that there is a single closing of the entire takedown.  The closing process and documents are also the same as a firm commitment underwritten offering including an underwriting agreement, opinion of counsel and a comfort letter.  As the public disclosure and closing of the offering generally occurs overnight, a CMPO earned the name an “overnight” offering.

Generally the necessary closing documents and public filings have been prepared and are on standby ready to be utilized when a deal is agreed upon.  Both the company and investors will wait for a favorable market window, such as an increase in the price and volume of the company’s stock, to close the offering.

S-3 Eligibility; NASDAQ Considerations; FINRA        

A CMPO requires an effective S-3 shelf registration statement and accordingly is only available to companies that qualify to use an S-3.  Among other requirements, to qualify to use an S-3 registration statement a company must have timely filed all Exchange Act reports, including Form 8-K, within the prior 12 months.  An S-3 also contains certain limitations on the value of securities that can be offered.  Companies that have an aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of $75 million or more, may offer the full amount of securities under an S-3 registration.  For companies that have an aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of less than $75 million, the company can offer up to one-third of that market value in any trailing 12-month period.  This one-third limitation is referred to as the “baby shelf rule.”

To calculate the non-affiliate float for purposes of S-3 eligibility, a company may look back 60 days and select the highest of the last sales prices or the average of the bid and ask prices on the principal exchange.  The registration capacity for a baby shelf is measured immediately prior to the offering and re-measured on a rolling basis in connection with subsequent takedowns.  The availability for a particular takedown is measured as the current allowable offering amount less any amounts actually sold under the same S-3 in prior takedowns.  Accordingly, the available offering amount will increase as a company’s stock price increases, and decrease as a stock price decreases.

A company should be careful that a CMPO is structured to comply with the NASDAQ definition of “public offering,” thereby avoiding NASDAQ’s rules requiring shareholder approval for private placements where the issuance will or could equal 20% or more of the pre-transaction outstanding shares.  In particular, NASDAQ requires advance shareholder approval when a company sells 20% or more of its outstanding common stock (or securities convertible into common stock) in a private offering, at a discount to the greater of the market price or book value per share of the common stock.  A separate NASDAQ rule also requires shareholder approval where officers, directors, employees, consultants or affiliates are issued common stock in a private placement at a discount to market price.  CMPO’s have been stopped in their tracks by NASDAQ requiring pre-closing shareholder approval.

A CMPO differs from a standard public offering as it is confidentially marketed and is completed with little or no advance market notice.  Accordingly, in determining whether a CMPO qualifies as a public offering, NASDAQ will consider: (i) the type of offering including whether it is being completed by an underwriter on a firm commitment or best-efforts basis (firm commitment being favorable); (ii) the manner of offering and marketing, including number of investors marketed to and how such investors were chosen (the more broad the marketing, the better); (iii) the prior relationship between the investors and the company or underwriter (again, the more broadly marketed, the better, as public offerings are generally widely marketed); (iv) offering terms including price (a deeper discount is unfavorable); and (v) the extent to which the company controls the offering and its distribution (insider participation is unfavorable).

NASDAQ also has rules requiring an advance application for the listing of additional shares resulting from follow-on offerings.  Generally NASDAQ requires 15 days advance notice, but will often waive this advance notice upon request.

A CMPO will need to comply with FINRA rule 5110, the corporate finance rule.  Generally FINRA will process a 5110 clearance on the same day.  Moreover, there are several exemptions to issuer 5110 compliance, including based on the size of the company’s public float.  For a brief overview of Rule 5110, see my blogHERE.

Confidentiality; Regulation FD; Insider Trading

By nature a CMPO involves the disclosure of confidential information to potential investors, including, but not limited to, that the company is considering a public offering takedown, the pricing terms of the offering, warrant coverage, and the disclosure of potentially confidential information during the due diligence phase.  To ensure compliance with Regulation FD and avoid insider trading, the company and its underwriters will obtain a confidentiality agreement from the potential investors.  The agreement will include a trading blackout for a specific period of time, generally until the offering either closes or is abandoned.

Although the confidential portion of the CMPO usually occurs very quickly (a week or two), many institutional investors require that the company issue a public “cleansing” statement if the offering does not proceed within a specified period of time.  The cleansing statement would need to disclose any material non-public information disclosed to the potential investor as part of the negotiation and due diligence related to the offering.  In the event the offering proceeds to a close, the offering documents (including potential free writing prospectus or prospectus supplement, Rule 134 press release and 8-K) will include all material non-public information previously disclosed to potential investors during the confidential phase.  Both the company and the investor need to be careful that the filed offering materials and/or cleansing statement contain all necessary information to avoid potential insider trading issues.

The company must be sure to also file with the SEC all written marketing offering materials associated with a registered offering either as part of the prospectus or as a free writing prospectus.  Generally with a CMPO, the written materials provided to investors are limited to public filings and investor presentation materials such as a PowerPoint already in the public domain that do not, in and of themselves, contain any material non-public information and therefore do not need to be filed with the SEC as offering materials.

As a reminder, Regulation FD excludes communications (i) to a person who owes the issuer a duty of trust or confidence such as legal counsel and financial advisors; (ii) communications to any person who expressly agrees to maintain the information in confidence (such as potential investors in a CMPO); and (iii) communications in connection with certain offerings of securities registered under the Securities Act of 1933 (this exemption does not include registered shelf offerings and, accordingly, generally does not include a CMPO).

Benefits of a CMPO

A CMPO offers a great deal of flexibility to a company and its bankers.  Utilized correctly, a CMPO can have minimal market impact.  It is widely believed that announcements of public offerings, and impending dilution and selling pressure, invite short selling and speculative short-term market activity.  Since a CMPO is confidential by nature and the time between the public awareness and completion of a particular takedown is very short (oftentimes the same day), the opportunity for speculating and short sellers is minimized.  Moreover, as a result of the confidential nature of a CMPO, if a particular offering or takedown is abandoned, the market is unaware, relieving the company of the typical downward pricing pressure associated with an abandoned offering.  Likewise, this confidential process allows the company to test the waters and only proceed when investor appetite is confirmed.

As a registered offering, CMPO securities are freely tradable and immediately transferable, incentivizing investment activity and reducing the negotiated discount to market associated with restricted securities.  Offering expenses for a CMPO are also less than a fully marketed follow-on public offering.  The CMPO is based on an existing S-3 shelf registration, thus reducing drafting costs.  Also, the expense of marketing an offering itself, including a road show, is reduced or eliminated altogether.

Although the structure of a CMPO requires that the issuing company be S-3 shelf registration eligible, CMPOs are often used by small and development-stage companies (such as technology and biotech companies) that have smaller market capitalizations and need to tap into the capital of the public markets on a more frequent basis to fund ongoing research and development of products.

The Author

Laura Anthony, Esq.
Founding Partner
Legal & Compliance, LLC
Corporate, Securities and Going Public Attorneys
LAnthony@LegalAndCompliance.com

Securities attorney Laura Anthony and her experienced legal team provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size private companies, OTC and exchange traded issuers as well as private companies going public on the NASDAQ, NYSE MKT or over-the-counter market, such as the OTCQB and OTCQX. For nearly two decades Legal & Compliance, LLC has served clients providing fast, personalized, cutting-edge legal service. The firm’s reputation and relationships provide invaluable resources to clients including introductions to investment bankers, broker dealers, institutional investors and other strategic alliances. The firm’s focus includes, but is not limited to, compliance with the Securities Act of 1933 offer sale and registration requirements, including private placement transactions under Regulation D and Regulation S and PIPE Transactions as well as registration statements on Forms S-1, S-8 and S-4; compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including registration on Form 10, reporting on Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K, and 14C Information and 14A Proxy Statements; Regulation A/A+ offerings; all forms of going public transactions; mergers and acquisitions including both reverse mergers and forward mergers, ; applications to and compliance with the corporate governance requirements of securities exchanges including NASDAQ and NYSE MKT; crowdfunding; corporate; and general contract and business transactions. Moreover, Ms. Anthony and her firm represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including the preparation of transaction documents such as merger agreements, share exchange agreements, stock purchase agreements, asset purchase agreements and reorganization agreements. Ms. Anthony’s legal team prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of federal and state securities laws and SROs such as FINRA and DTC for 15c2-11 applications, corporate name changes, reverse and forward splits and changes of domicile. Ms. Anthony is also the author of SecuritiesLawBlog.com, the OTC Market’s top source for industry news, and the producer and host of LawCast.com, the securities law network. In addition to many other major metropolitan areas, the firm currently represents clients in New York, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Boca Raton, West Palm Beach, Atlanta, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Washington, D.C., Denver, Tampa, Detroit and Dallas.

Contact Legal & Compliance LLC. Technical inquiries are always encouraged.

Follow me on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google+, Pinterest and Twitter.

Download our mobile app at iTunes.

Legal & Compliance, LLC makes this general information available for educational purposes only. The information is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Furthermore, the use of this information, and the sending or receipt of this information, does not create or constitute an attorney-client relationship between us. Therefore, your communication with us via this information in any form will not be considered as privileged or confidential.

This information is not intended to be advertising, and Legal & Compliance, LLC does not desire to represent anyone desiring representation based upon viewing this information in a jurisdiction where this information fails to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that jurisdiction. This information may only be reproduced in its entirety (without modification) for the individual reader’s personal and/or educational use and must include this notice.

© Legal & Compliance, LLC 2016


« »
SEC Issues Concept Release On Regulation S-K; Part 2
Posted by Securities Attorney Laura Anthony | May 17, 2016 Tags: , , , , ,

On April 15, 2016, the SEC issued a 341-page concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to certain business and financial disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K (“S-K Concept Release”).  This blog is the second part discussing that concept release.  In Part I, which can be read HERE, I discussed the background and general concepts for which the SEC provides discussion and seeks comment.  In this Part II, I will discuss the rules and recommendations made by the SEC and, in particular, those related to the 100, 200, 300, 500 and 700 series of Regulation S-K.

Background

The fundamental tenet of the federal securities laws is defined by one word: disclosure.  In fact, the SEC neither reviews nor opines on the merits of any company or transaction, but only upon the appropriate disclosure, including risks, made by that company.  However, excessive rote immaterial disclosure can dilute the material important information regarding that particular company and have the unintended consequence of weakening necessary disclosure to potential investors and the public trading markets.

The SEC non-financial disclosure requirements for both registration statements and reports under the Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) are found in Regulation S-K.

At the highest level, the purpose of disclosure is to provide investors and the marketplace with information needed to make informed investment and voting decisions.  As discussed in the S-K Concept Release, proper disclosure “may lead to more accurate share prices, discourage fraud, heighten monitoring of the managers of companies, and increase liquidity.”  Further, effective disclosure should “increase the integrity of securities markets, build investor confidence, and support the provision of capital to the market.”

The SEC seeks comment on hundreds of questions from broad conceptual points to specific rule changes.  In many cases the SEC indicates that additional disclosure might be necessary on a particular topic.  Although disclosure improvement is the goal, that does not necessarily mean less information and, in many cases, may actually mean more information.

Description of Business and Properties

The SEC believes that the information elicited under Item 101 regarding a description of the company’s business and Item 102 related to the company’s materially important physical properties, provides the necessary foundation needed by investors to make investing and voting decisions.  This basic information assists in putting other disclosure items into context.  The SEC seeks comment on whether Items 101 and 102 should be eliminated or modified and whether new or different disclosure requirements should be added to these Items.

The Concept Release contains detailed discussion of each of the requirements under Items 101 and 102, including prior comments received from the public and SEC views.  Currently Item 101 requires a description of the general development of the company’s business over the past 3 years for smaller reporting companies and 5 years for other classes of company, or such shorter period as the company has been in business.  Item 102 requires disclosure of the location and general character of plants, mines and other materially important physical properties.

Examples of information required include disclosure of the basic background of the business such as: (i) the year of formation; (ii) type of entity; (iii) nature and results of any bankruptcy, receivership or similar; (iv) nature and result of any material reclassification, merger or consolidation; (v) the acquisition or disposition of any material assets outside the ordinary course of business; and (vi) material changes to the business operations.  In addition, Item 101 requires a narrative description of a company’s business, including 13 specific areas as follows: (i) principal products produced and services rendered; (ii) new products or segments; (iii) sources and availability of raw materials; (iv) intellectual property; (v) seasonality of business; (vi) working capital practices; (vii) dependence on certain customers; (viii) dollar amount of backlog orders believed to be firm; (ix) business subject to renegotiation or termination of government contracts; (x) competitive conditions; (xi) company sponsored research and development activities; (xii) compliance with environmental laws; and (xiii) number of employees.

Smaller reporting companies benefit from several other scaled disclosures from the standard requirements, including: (i) elimination of the requirement to discuss seasonality, working capital practices, backlog or government contracts; (ii) names of principal suppliers; (iii) royalty agreements or labor contracts; (iv) need for government approval for products or services; and (v) effects of existing or probable government regulations.

Emerging growth companies must meet all of the standard requirements.  Moreover, keeping in line with the concept of materiality, where a smaller reporting company is in a business that makes any of the standard disclosures material to its business, it must include those discussions, even if not technically required.  Accordingly, for example, a smaller reporting company in a cannabis-related industry would need to include a discussion on the need for government approval for products and services, and the effects of existing or probable government regulations on its business, even though the scaled disclosure requirements would not otherwise require such discussion.

As with other areas of discussion, the SEC requests comments on the scaled disclosure requirements and whether the current disparities between requirements related to smaller reporting companies and emerging growth companies should be eliminated.

The SEC discusses eliminating redundancies in the 101 and 102 disclosure requirements.  In particular there are several categories in Form 8-K that request the same information elicited in Items 101 and 102 and included in all 10-Q’s and 10-K’s.  Information on business background is included in the MD&A discussion and in footnotes to financial statements.  Redundancies could be eliminated by allowing cross-referencing, including internal hyperlinks.  Moreover, the SEC could, and should, distinguish between new registrants disclosing their business background for the first time, and those that are established reporting companies repeating information again and again.

Many of the detailed requirements may not be relevant in today’s business environment, which differs greatly from even twenty years ago.  For instance, many businesses no longer have physical locations or corporate headquarters but rather run through virtual offices.  For those businesses, providing a detailed discussion of each location (home office…) would not be relevant and rather could diminish the value of the business discussion.  Likewise, businesses in today’s world often outsource or hire independent contractors.  Consideration should be given to expanding the requirements to include such independent contractors, or eliminate this requirement altogether where it does not add value to the particular business.  For example, it may be important to know that certain companies are scaling back on their workforce, while for others, the information is not relevant.

Likewise, Regulation S-K does not currently address the current reliance on web-based and intellectual property-based assets and as such, additional disclosure items may need to be included. Another area that may need increased disclosure relates to international business operations and reliance on non-U.S.-based assets.

Management Discussion and Analysis

Although many aspects of disclosure are important, I believe none are quite as important as the financial information and future prospects.  Regulation S-X contains the actual financial statement disclosure requirements, and Item 303 of Regulation S-K contains the narrative discussion requirements related to that financial information.  This management, discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) not only delivers an explanation of the financial statements, but provides a unique opportunity in SEC reporting for a company to illustrate its distinctiveness among a sea of other fish.

MD&A is intended to provide a narrative of a company’s financial statements and future prospects through the eyes of management.  The Regulation S-K Concept Release clearly shows the SEC propensity for MD&A to use a principles/materiality approach and to steer away from a recitation of the financial statements themselves.  The SEC also recognizes the concerns that a company has in presenting forward-looking information, and in particular, 10b-5 liability if the plans do not turn out as disclosed.

In recent years management has used MD&A to not only explain the financial statements prepared in accordance with Regulation S-X, which in turn is based on US GAAP, but rather to explain away those financial statements.  Approximately 90% of companies use MD&A to provide non-GAAP financial metrics to illustrate their financial performance and prospects.  As an example, EBITDA is a non-GAAP number often included by management in MD&A.  There has been a rise in recent controversy over the use of these non-GAAP numbers, an in-depth discussion of which will be the topic of a future blog.

However, the short version is that 90% of companies use non-GAAP numbers to explain their financial operations and the SEC is pushing back, making a review of the rules related to non-GAAP use a priority.  There are very valid reasons for using non-GAAP numbers, such as EBITDA, which is an established indicator of a company’s performance and ability to meet financial obligations.  Likewise, certain non-cash balance sheet items, such as derivative liability related to options, warrants, and other convertible instruments, are confusing and often are never realized in a way that has an actual impact on a company’s performance.  However, there can be a slippery slope with a company cherry-picking GAAP and non-GAAP numbers to create a picture of financial stability that may not be accurate.  I hope that in reviewing this area, the SEC is not myopically stuck on the purity of its view of GAAP, but considers that if 90% of companies find a need to go outside the rules, perhaps the rules themselves needs some adjustment.

Risk Factors

Risk-related disclosures need a thorough review and potential overhaul.  Although the SEC has long stated that risk factors should not be boilerplate repetition of items applicable to the market as a whole and not necessarily applicable to a particular company, most companies use boilerplate language.  I note that Item 503 contains examples of risks that a company can make related to its offerings, and so, of course, those risks, in boilerplate format, are always included in registration statements and reports.

Currently, risk-related disclosures are currently included in multiple items under Regulation S-K, including Item 503 related to investment risk and Item 305 related to market risk.  The focus of the SEC discussion is on aggregating risk information in a more central readable format and improving the content to enhance investors’ ability to evaluate the particular risk factors.

Securities of the Company

Several Items in Regulation S-K address the securities of a company.  For example, Item 202 requires a description of the terms and conditions of securities being registered; Item 201 requires disclosure of the number of holders of common securities; Item 701 requires disclosure of sales of unregistered securities and use of proceeds from offerings, and Item 703 requires disclosure of securities re-purchased by a company and its affiliates.

As with other areas, the SEC focuses on whether these disclosures should be modified, increased or eliminated and on the presentation of the information.

The Author

Laura Anthony, Esq.
Founding Partner
Legal & Compliance, LLC
Corporate, Securities and Going Public Attorneys
LAnthony@LegalAndCompliance.com

Securities attorney Laura Anthony and her experienced legal team provides ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size private companies, OTC and exchange traded issuers as well as private companies going public on the NASDAQ, NYSE MKT or over-the-counter market, such as the OTCQB and OTCQX. For nearly two decades Legal & Compliance, LLC has served clients providing fast, personalized, cutting-edge legal service. The firm’s reputation and relationships provide invaluable resources to clients including introductions to investment bankers, broker dealers, institutional investors and other strategic alliances. The firm’s focus includes, but is not limited to, compliance with the Securities Act of 1933 offer sale and registration requirements, including private placement transactions under Regulation D and Regulation S and PIPE Transactions as well as registration statements on Forms S-1, S-8 and S-4; compliance with the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including registration on Form 10, reporting on Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K, and 14C Information and 14A Proxy Statements; Regulation A/A+ offerings; all forms of going public transactions; mergers and acquisitions including both reverse mergers and forward mergers, ; applications to and compliance with the corporate governance requirements of securities exchanges including NASDAQ and NYSE MKT; crowdfunding; corporate; and general contract and business transactions. Moreover, Ms. Anthony and her firm represents both target and acquiring companies in reverse mergers and forward mergers, including the preparation of transaction documents such as merger agreements, share exchange agreements, stock purchase agreements, asset purchase agreements and reorganization agreements. Ms. Anthony’s legal team prepares the necessary documentation and assists in completing the requirements of federal and state securities laws and SROs such as FINRA and DTC for 15c2-11 applications, corporate name changes, reverse and forward splits and changes of domicile. Ms. Anthony is also the author of SecuritiesLawBlog.com, the OTC Market’s top source for industry news, and the producer and host ofLawCast.com, the securities law network. In addition to many other major metropolitan areas, the firm currently represents clients in New York, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, Boca Raton, West Palm Beach, Atlanta, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Washington, D.C., Denver, Tampa, Detroit and Dallas.

Contact Legal & Compliance LLC. Technical inquiries are always encouraged.

Follow me on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Google+, Pinterest and Twitter.

Download our mobile app at iTunes.

Legal & Compliance, LLC makes this general information available for educational purposes only. The information is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Furthermore, the use of this information, and the sending or receipt of this information, does not create or constitute an attorney-client relationship between us. Therefore, your communication with us via this information in any form will not be considered as privileged or confidential.

This information is not intended to be advertising, and Legal & Compliance, LLC does not desire to represent anyone desiring representation based upon viewing this information in a jurisdiction where this information fails to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that jurisdiction. This information may only be reproduced in its entirety (without modification) for the individual reader’s personal and/or educational use and must include this notice.

© Legal & Compliance, LLC 2016


« »