no funds due to purchaser in case of termination accoring to 1. (c) (iii)?

[goeddea]

Looking over the SAFT, I'm wondering (really mostly where I went wrong in parsing the agreement):

• The agreement terminates if there is no network launch by an agreed date (1. (c) (iii))
• The company may well continue to pursue a network launch (just at a later) data, or otherwise continue operation.
• The only place in the agreement which deals with a return of funds to the purchaser is 1 (b). This only applies if there is a dissolution event before termination. The company not doing a network launch before an agreed date is not a dissolution event.
• Is there then no obligation by the company to repay funds to the purchaser?

I have no idea whether

1. I'm just missing something in the SAFT,
2. this is a bug, or
3. this is a feature, not a bug.

[ezredd]

there is mismatch between the agreement

[1] https://saftproject.com/static/Form-of-SAFT-for-token-pre-sale.docx

and the version of the same agreement which is available as Exhibit 1 of the whitepaper

[2] https://saftproject.com/static/SAFT-Project-Whitepaper.pdf

namely in the white paper there is no such close as 1. (c) (iii) or 1 (c) (iv)

note that in [1] it is stated that upon lack of launching prior to DATE or raising less money than expected then "the Company shall have the obligation to repay to the Purchasers the aggregate amount of all Purchase Amounts"

[goeddea]

I read 1. (c) in the downloadable docx version that the "obligation to repay to the purchasers the aggregate amount of all purchase amounts" is

• contained in the brackets for the optional termination condition (iv)
• part of a sublcause which starts with "provided, that in the case of (iv)" so that this cannot (based on the present text) apply to 1. (c) (iii)