Peleg responds: "I didn't understand what kind of agreement? All as a condition of raising money... I'll send it to you, right, there are several versions."
Don: "The last of the 2.3 percent"
After the conversation between Don and Fayette detailed above, Don wrote to Peleg at 3:46 p.m.: "Sign it back – I inserted a clause of the return of the 185 in case there is no IPO, which is the relative portion of 2 million."
Peleg answers: "You erased"
Don replies: "Because I put the wrong amount - 230 now I'm changing it and sending it to you."
And at 3:50 p.m., Don sends the third agreement to the faction.
- There is no dispute that the agreement that was sent by Don to Peleg and which was signed by Peleg on the same day and returned to the discussion (attached as Appendix 27 to Peleg's affidavit, hereinafter: "the Third Agreement") includes two changes vis-à-vis the Second Agreement:
First, in Section 3.1.2 only the heading remains:
"In case public registration (IPO) for an amount in the range of $ 8,000,000 up to 15,000,000$ including Pre IPO investment
Subsection (a) quoted above was removed, and instead clause 3.1.3 was added, which reads:
"3.1.3 The Finder will be entitled to 230K USD for the bridge loan an IPO transaction
- The Finder will entitle to 230K right after the bridge loan will be deposited in full the Finder will be obligate to invest back the 230K USD in the company CLA.
- In case IPO will not occur, the company will buy the stocks generated from the bridge kaon the Finder invested and the finder will reimburse the company with 185k USD, in the case the finder will not reimburse the company with 185k USD within 60 days the company will deduct the 185k from the total amount of the CLA"
In addition, clause 3.1.4 is deleted from this agreement. With regard to this, I will note that, since, as stated, clause 3.1.2 included only the title without content, whereas the content added in clause 3.1.3 – did not differ from the number of sections as a result of the deletion of clause 3.1.4 – therefore, I will first note that visually it is not easy to discern the deletion of this clause.