Again, a lot of basic finance errors you are making here sorry
First this talk of "new shares" that MMs will want etc - Just because the company will have "authorization" for additional shares it doesn't mean they "issue" them.
A company issues shares when it needs money; obviously if the company has just won an award where they are distributing cash to shareholders as a dividend they don't need money. Thus, those who want shares need to buy them in the open market, which means share price goes up and good for existing shareholders.
The company doesn't issue new shares (your point on 100--->240) to provide "liquidity" for MMs who want shares or anyone else. They only dilute (sell shares from treasury to the market) when they need funding. This concept is rudimentary and I suggest you read up on how companies finance themselves and the difference between issued and outstanding shares.
Also, a 20-1 reverse would put the stock price at 60 cents - not -$3 as you suggest??
At 60 cents it's still on the otcbb and margin requirements make it too costly to short - another error in your analysis
In the issue of fiduciary duty- they have a duty to shareholders yes, to maximize the long term value of the company, not give preferential treatment to which shareholders have been around longer. Your views are an incorrect assessment of corporate govenance and would actually be viewed as "unfair" in corporate governance standards as all shareholders should be treated equally regardless of how long they've owned
Unfortunately, the company does not "owe" shareholders some sort of return. You own equity not debt and assume the risks of equity, many of which have happened here (Dilution etc). It is up to you as an investor to assess the risks and potential returns and see if it makes sense. If you buy earlier and win great, but if someone buys later and gets as good of a return or better because of new information, the company does not owe equity holders any sort of redress
