Newmedman - Thank you
Good to be able to come back from exile, though keeping a low profile and will only post on this board. :/
It is unfortunate that DGTLF has had to be delayed in fighting for its patent rights for an entire year, another something that smells IMO. Meanwhile the counterfeit brands continue to sell their product in the interim while we all wait for a patent trial. More and more I am realizing that the law seems to be not only without balls but without a 'stick' to use to beat the criminal Dogs back from preying on the righteous. Perhaps the entire system of law has succumbed to the powers that be, taken their bribe money to look the other way and now are basically impotent to stand up to the criminal element and enforce law. It is an outrage that DGTLF should be forced to wait an entire year for 'discovery'. Monday morning the court should open its doors and demand both parties to be there displaying their designs, one will have a registered official patent and the other will not and the case will close in favor of the claimant, it is that simple. But of course, money and power are involved, so everything gets a whole lot more complicated, mysteriously.
We have seen that same kind of complication used in other ways in other stories recently as well. :/
It still to this day is a mystery how so many shares were traded at USD$0.05/shr back in Jan and then immediately 3k shares were sold at $0.001/shr (where it still is now) and yet that large block traded at .05 does not appear in the trading tape! >:(
It is good to hear that at least the SEC did not 'stick' it to SFI shareholders by demanding some sort of monetary penalties, it seems they only wished to primarily issue the injunctive relief so that by law going forward the principles could not PR falsities to shareholders. Along those lines, I feel somewhat relieved that the SEC complaint was settled late Sept 2011 and then a couple weeks later the PR came out about the signed agreement with JDC; it gives me hope that while the CEO was under injunction not to spew falsehoods to shareholders that such news was announced, showing me for one that it must be true. Perhaps all this time with apparantly no progress is simply because the corp is at a dead end until JDC can get their act together and provide liquidity and therefore operating funds to the corp, 'marketable asset' and all; ie.. there really is nothing else that can be done, just waiting now, there is no money, but no expenditures either so corp is not necessarily 'dead', just in time out right now, IMO.
The lack of US patent news is definitely unfortunate though. Not the end of the world but still unfortunate as I was under the impression that with the Euro patent, they were supposed to be 'fast tracked' for the US patent, but it seems the examiner wanted to play semantics mumbo-jumbo games and either delayed or killed the application. I still think someone over there got a nice fat yellow envelope to act extra stingy on the technicalities. ;)
As for the stock, that is another story entirely. Its been discussed over and over but suffice it to say that as you pointed out, the FINRA numbers were completely out of whack and its obvious some participant or participants were not fully reporting the metrics. It also remains very mysterious that the reporting of the FTDs after the July 1 2011 date has fallen out of existence and since the lock no failures have been reported, especially the all important ones for the T+3 settlement days of the 'unusual trading' days. There were at least 40M legit shorts which have since been covered, no one disputes that yet there are still dogs out there who seem to want to confuse the issue by constantly pointing out that the short interest is 0% and so it proves there were no phantom shares or naked shorts on the books, which is nonsense. Of course there will never be any 'evidence' of NSS if the FTD reporting is non-existant, which btw is public information but is for some reason being withheld.
Another ~40M were probably legit trades while the rest of the nearly 100M shares traded could easily have been NSS. The float was either 300M and this raised it to 400M, or it was already 400M and this raised it to 500M but not on the T/A books, just failures sitting in various TDA, ETrade, ST accounts. What that means is that there are indeed available shares (real and settled) which did not trade on those two days, so there is no excuse for any inability to mandate a buy-in, and force brokerages to close-out. Lastly, the shorting continues even during this 'global lock'. Take a look at shortvolume.com (1 year period), with a tiny fraction of the total number of shares the short ratio has moved up well past 50%, wherein some days the entire volume 'traded' is just a short sale that is covered days later. In my estimations the criminals are no where even close to covering all the failed shares sold. This is mainly because all of the sellers at these par value levels have already sold and there are no more sellers at these sub penny levels. I thought it was very interesting to see Friday when the $0.002/5,000 ASK once taken away, revealed the next ASK which was $0.052/80,000!!!
I wonder how much more volume is up at even higher levels?! Hmmmmmmm
About the Rapid market cap, I share your overall notion that it would be difficult to justify a pps that most are hoping for, but actually if one compares VPC* numbers, it seems not as impossible as one may think at first.
VPC* O/S is 60M, earnings were about $700k last year and assets/liabilities ratio is roughly the same between the two corps.
Therefore, VPC* EPS is $0.01/shr and bid is at $0.11/shr so P/E is 11. Assume that RFM* can trade with P/E of 11, and make the same earnings $700k, with a 800M O/S, that would be $0.0096/shr fair price, very close to a penny. Obviously the question is can they make $700k? Well, the interesting thing is the profit margin for VPC* is much less at about 33%, whereas for RFM* its about 66%, so while VPC* gross was $9.2M, cost of sales was $6.7M, so even if RFM* made half the gross profit margin much higher they would make much more. They can also use consulting revs for overall annual costs so I think earnings at $1M at the least for RFM* is attainable, plus the market seems to be trading it w/ P/E of 15, not 11, this would mean fair price at nearly two cents. I also think you may be underestimating demand. Selling 1k units per month gets them close to this fair price valuation and they have allegedly 12 dispensaries gtg in the distribution chain so (with funding of course) if each sold about 83 units per month, thats about 3 units a day sold per distributor, then this valuation is attainable. Its all just guesswork but I think its somewhat reasonable to suggest that 3 units per day could be sold at each of the dispensaries in the chain.
I too am planning on going short FB out of the gate, but never underestimate the power of the naive mob, let it spike and start to turn over, then short it..
"I'm allergic to the hater type..."
"It's mine I spend it..."