SEC Gives Former Beverage Company Long Blockchain Corp. A Subpoena
United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has given Long Blockchain Corp., based in New York a subpoena. The now blockchain development company was formerly a drinks manufacturer. This is according to Bloomberg report on August 1, 2018.
According to the company’s reports, the subpoena that was originally dated July 10, required the firm to provide particular documents to the commission. Asked for the details of this documents, the company refused to give further details. According to their press release, the firm said that they were fully cooperating with the SEC’s investigations and that they were not in a position to predict if SEC would institute any proceedings related to the subpoena or even predict the outcome of any possible proceeding.
According to the new CEO Andy Shape, as of yesterday, the blockchain company announced that it will be changing its operations to deal with loyalty program schemes. It plans to work with Stran Loyalty Group which is a new subsidiary to perform this role.
The CEO said that the key to future growth and massive scalability lies in creating stronger loyalty with customers engaged in the loyalty programs by advancing technology.
Formerly known as “Long Island Iced Tea”, the company joined the blockchain industry in January and then changed its name to “Long Blockchain Corp.” Changing from the drinks to blockchain industry pushed the company’s stock up by 500%. The company is now planning to sell about 1.6 million shares at a price of $5.25 per unit aiming to start Bitcoin (BTC) mining.
Long Blockchain Corp, despite its tremendous growth Nasdaq Stock Market announced in April that it would delist the company because of low market capitalization. The company countered this move by placing their shares on the Pink Current Information tier that is managed by the OTC Markets Group Inc. Long Blockchain Corp. remained a public company after being delisted.
This move has, however, affected the company’s value. A Bloomberg report valued the company at around $5 million, compared to its value of $70 million last December when the company changed its name.