ASPAC I Acquisition Corp.

The amendment exists because the target's share count moved after signing: the restated capitalisation representation says 601,830 ordinary shares were outstanding on 15 February 2023 and 698,123 are outstanding at closing, a 16 per cent increase, and those 96,293 new shares had no consideration mechanic under the original agreement. The exchange ratio schedule is Exhibit B and is not in the portion read, so the dilution to SPAC shareholders cannot be quantified from this document and was not estimated.

A funded one-month extension with the resulting trust balance stated in the report: approximately $21.1 million after the $20,000 payment. The extension payment is small relative to the trust, so the per-share trust value is essentially unchanged by the deposit itself. Filed a week after the November 7 Nasdaq 300-holder deficiency notice.

The two changed numbers are the story this filing does not tell: trust fell from roughly $39.1 million to $21.1 million, so approximately $18 million was redeemed out at an intervening extension vote, and the monthly deposit dropped from $90,000 to $20,000 because it is scaled to the shrunken public float. That is a SPAC losing about half its trust while still having named no target, five months into monthly extensions. Watch the December 17 deposit and whether the remaining trust is large enough to interest any target at all.

A holder-count deficiency, the standard consequence of heavy redemptions shrinking the public float. The filing states that if Nasdaq accepts the plan it CAN grant an extension of up to 180 calendar days from the date of the letter to evidence compliance — an outcome contingent on acceptance, not a granted extension. The report names no consequence for the trust or for any pending transaction.

The company quantifies the benefit itself: about three cents per share across six months, for a fourteenth month of extensions on a vehicle 20 months past its IPO. That is effectively free time for the sponsor. An NTA requirement amendment accompanies the extension, which would remove the floor that otherwise blocks redemptions from emptying the trust. Redeeming at each vote returns the accumulated trust value rather than funding another half-year of searching.

The sixth $90,000 month on identical terms, the sequence running April 11, May 11, July 12, August 11 and now September 12, 2023. The date this filing establishes is October 17, 2023 and it states nothing about how many further months remain available. The trust has risen from approximately $37.9 million to approximately $39.1 million across the five reports, which the company states without attributing the change.

Third month, same $90,000, same one-month step: this SPAC is renting time rather than progressing a deal. The trust has grown roughly $600,000 across the three notices — deposits plus interest — so per-share trust value keeps accreting for holders who do not redeem, which is the only economics on offer here. The signal to watch is the chain breaking: a missed October deposit, or a charter deadline reached with still no named target, points to liquidation and a return of trust rather than a combination.

The second identical monthly extension in a row: $90,000 buys 30 days and nothing else changes. The ~$300,000 rise in trust between July 12 and August 11 is the deposit plus interest, so the per-share trust value is still accreting for holders who stay. What matters is the absence — two months of 425 filings with no named target means this is IR/clock maintenance, not deal progress. Watch whether the September 17 deposit is made and whether a business combination is ever announced before the extension chain stops.

The fifth $90,000 month on identical terms, the sequence running April 11, May 11, July 12 and now August 11. The date this filing establishes is September 17, 2023 and it states nothing about how many further months remain available. The trust has risen from approximately $37.9 million to approximately $38.8 million across the four reports, which the company states without attributing the change.

The fourth consecutive $90,000 month on identical terms, the sequence running April 11, May 11, and now July 12. The date this filing establishes is August 17, 2023 and it states nothing about how many further months remain available. The trust has moved from approximately $37.9 million through $38.1 million to approximately $38.5 million across the three reports, which the company states without attributing the change.

This is a real status change, but only of the clock: the SPAC bought exactly one more month for $90,000, which implies a small-per-month sponsor pay-to-play structure rather than deal momentum. The ~$38.5 million trust figure is company disclosure, not a speaker's estimate. Holders should watch whether the next $90,000 deposit lands before August 17, 2023 and whether a target is ever named — repeated one-month extensions with no announced business combination are the classic run-up to liquidation.

Third month, third $90,000, and the trust rises approximately $37.9m to $38.1m to $38.4m across the three filings - the deposits, not interest, are what move it. The document also shows why form code is a poor guide to content: one accession carries a merger-agreement amendment AND a routine extension payment. Detect-only: the July 17, 2023 date and the approximately $38.4 million were not written to any deadline, trust or floor field, and the amendment's terms are in an exhibit that was not read.

The target is now funding the SPAC's extensions, and the price of that money is the SPAC's own remedies: for $140,000 A SPAC I gave up the right to terminate and to collect a break-up fee over a missed financial-statement deliverable. That the U.S. GAAP financials were not delivered by February 28, 2023 is itself disclosed here. Loans repayable ONLY on closing also align the target's recovery with the deal completing.

A second consecutive monthly extension at the same $90,000 price, and the pair of filings shows the mechanism plainly: the deadline advances one month at a time and only while someone keeps paying, so any date taken from either filing is valid for at most a month. The approximately $38.1 million is a May 11, 2023 figure rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, not a per-share redemption value. Detect-only: nothing written to a deadline, trust or floor field.

The second consecutive month bought at $90,000, on the same terms as the April 11 payment that ran the date to May 17. The date this filing establishes is June 17, 2023 and nothing here states how many further monthly payments are available. The trust figure moved from approximately $37.9 million to approximately $38.1 million between the two deposits, which the filings state without attributing the change.

This is a one-month extension bought for $90,000, so the outer date it states is only good until the next payment decision; the approximately $37.9 million is an April 11, 2023 figure stated to the nearest hundred thousand and is not a per-share redemption value. Detect-only: neither the date nor the trust amount was written to any deadline, trust or floor field. A 425 with no proxy legend at all is also a reminder that the form code alone does not tell a reader whether a document is deal communication or housekeeping.

A month of runway bought for $90,000 — the mechanics of a paid monthly extension, stated plainly. The date this filing establishes is May 17, 2023, reached by an extension already funded; it says nothing about how many further months are available or what they would cost. The approximately $37.9 million trust figure is the company's own statement measured immediately after the deposit.

The proposal cuts the extension price from ten cents a share per quarter to five or six cents a month — an increase in the monthly rate but spread over a longer runway, and it replaces a fixed $690,000 obligation with a per-share amount that falls as holders redeem. Against roughly $70.96 million of trust, redeeming at this meeting captures the value accumulated under the old terms; staying funds eight more months of searching.

What changed: Announcement 425 — a supplement to the definitive proxy statement/prospectus filed on March 1, 2024 by A SPAC I Mini Acquisition Corp. (British Virgin Islands) with A SPAC I Acquisition Corp. (ASCA) as subject company. ASCA filed a DEFM14A and PubCo a Rule 424(b)(3) prospectus (Reg. No. 333-275208) on February 14, 2024 for a special meeting first held March 1, 2024. The supplement discloses that the chairman adjourned that meeting to March 4, 2024 at 9:00 a.m. ET, held at Loeb & Loeb in New York and by webcast, and that the redemption request deadline was NOT extended. Why it matters: This is the first filing in the ASCA series to name a transaction at all: after eight months of $90,000-then-$20,000 monthly extension deposits with no target disclosed, ASCA is voting on a combination with A SPAC I Mini Acquisition Corp. and its registration is effective. The operative detail for holders is the asymmetry — the meeting moved but the redemption deadline did not, so anyone who had not already tendered by the original cut-off cannot use the extra days to exit. Watch the March 4 vote and the final redemption count against the shrunken trust.

What changed: Item 8.01 other events. On February 15, 2024 A SPAC I Acquisition Corp. made a $20,000 deposit (the Extension Payment) to the trust account and extended the period it has to consummate an initial business combination from February 17, 2024 to March 17, 2024. The filing states that following the deposit, the amount of funds remaining in the trust account was approximately $21.4 million. Why it matters: The fourth consecutive funded monthly step at $20,000. The stated trust balance continues to rise — approximately $21.1 million, $21.17 million, $21.29 million and now $21.4 million across the four reports — with no redemptions reported in between, so accrued interest exceeds the deposits.

What changed: A SPAC I Acquisition Corp. issued a proxy/prospectus dated February 14, 2024, mailed on or about February 16, 2024, for a special meeting on March 1, 2024 at 9 a.m. ET at Loeb & Loeb in New York and by webcast, to approve a merger agreement dated February 15, 2023 and amended June 12, 2023 and December 6, 2023 with PubCo, merger sub, NewGenIvf and its principal shareholders. Aggregate consideration for the acquisition merger is $50,000,000. Why it matters: Trust of roughly $21.27 million against a $50 million purchase price means the SPAC cannot fund the deal in cash even with no redemptions, so consideration is being paid in stock and the combined company will start thinly capitalised. The maximum-redemption case of 1,932,471 shares leaves existing shareholders about 30.0% of PubCo, so control passes to the NewGenIvf principal shareholders either way. Units carry three-quarters of a warrant at $11.50 plus a right to one-tenth of a share, and the rights convert automatically, adding shares at closing whether or not a holder participates.