Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Otc site says OS was updated yesterday.
Oops double post
Thank you, you are fast.
That is my theory.
The behavior I see makes me think that they view going public in US as a mistake.
If they keep the share price down, they will be able to buy back slowly over time and eventually go private again.
They certainly behave like it is privately held.
Ill find the link that says it, but they ARE audited, just not in the US, and not by US standards.
One reference to it, is when they are late filing, they mention delay in obtaining the audited financials from a sub as one of the reasons.
With all the outstanding DD on this board, I honestly thought that pointing a singular mistake in how something was being represented would be welcomed.
I would think the people that are here for the long haul wouldnt want to see spikes on inaccurate info.
Its not even a mistake in the DD, just the interpretation of the DD and its benefit to us, being made by an individual and he represented it as fact, when it clearly is not.
I am an investor, not a basher and not a shill.
The response here today is actually the first time I have had serious reservations about the community on this board.
My only hope was to keep the posts about what is happening accurate and factual, as I actually believe we have a gem. Why tarnish the perception in anyones eyes?
I took the time to write out rational responses and answer the questions that were asked of me, but cant help but feel that those replying didnt read the posts, then mock me while putting in my mouth, misrepresenting what I said AND misrepresenting the publicly available information.
This could have been a 1 post deal, but instead, it turned into a multi-post deal telling me how wrong I am and how dare I question the accuracy of powerbattles.
He did some good DD, sure, but you treated this as he couldnt possibly be wrong. That pretty much tells me everything I could everything I need to know about the info here.
I will just go back to reading and not posting anymore. Good luck to you all.
I bought in @ 0.0011 and still own every share I bought at that level.
It does clearly say that it is the target.
It also is pretty clearly not promising that.
And the shareholder part of the sentence means LPI shareholders, not UCPA.
The stake UCPA has in LPI is 5%, so that is 5 million, not 100 million.
Of that still hypothetical 5%, none of it has been promised to be returned to UCPA shareholders.
I take your point, but what I am stating is that there is no evidense to support the claims.
Even the most seasoned and professional researchers can make mistakes. It gets pretty frustrating when the arguement I receive back seems to entirely miss the point.
It is not an "in my opinion scenario".
The LPI CEO making that statement does not equal UCPA shareholders getting a dividend.
It doesnt even mean that LPI shareholders are getting a dividend, as it was a forward looking statement. They only said they hope.
.
Period
Full stop.
Besides the fact that the CEO of LPI has no control over UCPA company finances, no dividend has been issued that we evidence of.
Yet you post "I keep telling people, the dividend is real".
If you posted instead "The dividend is a real possibility" I would have less of an arguement.
But, saying it like that, on the UCPA board, makes it sound as though UCPA shareholders are the subject, that is misleading.
Which I said.
Why am I the only person seeing this?
I repeatedly say 'read the post'.
I think that reading the post and understanding the information being presented is a crucial part of being able to have a productive conversation about it. I cant help but feel at least a few people are skipping this step.
LPI does not control UCPA so the forward looking statements from the LPI CEO about his shareholders is not a discussion about us.
So, again, if LPI issues the dividend to TKM, that is still a seperate company from UCPA. So here is the other layers of corporate action I mentioned...
At that point, we would actually need the management of TKM to pay out UCPA, and for UCPA to decide yet again to return that money to the shareholders.
We own shares of the company value, we do own or control the companies assets.
This is not factually accurate.
Its doesnt matter how many shares we own.
We have claim to value in the company.
Its assets are valued, and added to the company value.
No direct pass through relationship with UCPA is described in any public filing.
And since you all werent confused enough before, UCPA doesnt actually own the LPI stake either.
TKM does, and while that is a wholly owned subsidiary, it does show that what is being represented here is even further from the truth than even what I was saying.
LPI would have to issue dividend to TKM, the directors of that company would need to decide to pay up to UCPA, who's management would then additionally authorize a dividend to UCPA shareholders.
Powerbattles is 3 corporate activities from beginning to be correct.
Even when the dividend was mentioned by the LPI, it sounded like a forward looking statement and pretty far from guarantee.
I dont own any shares in LPI and neither do you. This is what is wrong with your statements.
Kindo got it right. This is the correct reading of my statements.
That is not what I am saying and if you continue to believe that then I cant do anything to help your illiterate ass.
Accurately portray what I am saying or do not attempt to convey the message.
Read my previous posts. Not the misinterpretation of what I very clearly wrote in english only a few posts ago.
Seems to start around post #26972.
Making inferences that UCPA shareholders are to be paid a dividend.
We are not... it is possible that LPI issues a dividend, to its private shareholders, which includes UCPA. This is very different than UCPA shares being paid a dividend.
Its also possible, that UCPA decides for whatever reason that they would like to pay dividend as well, but this is a separate event, that has not been mentioned by the UCPA board in regards to the LPI investment. UCPA has not done or said anything that seems to mention or hint at a dividend and definitely nothing that constitutes a confirmation of these claims.
I really dont think I can even say anything else without beginning to repeat myself over and over again.
Really, go back, reread what others are saying, the math they are posting...
Using UCPA shares as the basis...
Its just, at its core, a serious misunderstanding...
There is no publicly available information that will support the theory that LPI will pay UCPA shareholders a dividend, yet people are still posting thingz like "the dividend is real" which is misleading at best.
An LPI dividend would be paid to UCPA, raising the company's (UCPA) value, and thats what we own shares in.
Instead of me posting about this more, powerbattles should clear this up.
He is the one making the claim.
I am replying to specific posts, not making blanket statements.
You can read the posts being replied to by clicking the link at the top of the message.
I get pretty specific...
Reread my post.
I am all for UCPA, just some of things being said on this board are not true.
We want people to buy because the company is a good investment, not because they were lied to... its that simple.
Im not even saying the lie is intentional, its just not true.
Love UCPA and love the posters on the board here.
This is part of the reason why I feel it is very important to keep it factual.
A little dreaming and speculation is even alright but when I see people doing math on their windfall if LPI paid UCPA shares a dividend (which, again, will never happen) I feel the need to correct the record.
We dont want people buying on false hopes. The simple truth is that this is a great company and nothing more than the facts should be needed to present your case.
I am not saying they would turn down a dividend... I'm saying we are NOT the "shareholders" being spoken of in the quotes by the LPI CEO.
Because, very simply, we arent the shareholders.
We own exactly 0 shares in LPI, its not publicly traded.
UCPA owns 5 percent of LPI in the same way they own 30.1% In Sight AS; in the same way they own 33.3% of HowCom AB; in the same way they own 75% of Tre Kroner Media Denmark; in the same way they own 40% of Media Team Plus; in the same way they own 85% of Local Planet AB.
What you are saying about their obligations to pay that dividend to us are wrong. Our shares represent fractions of the VALUE of the company. If the company is paid the dividend, it adds value, and we should see a proportional gain in regards to it.
The shares they own are an asset, assets are valued in cash terms and added to the overall valuation of the company.
UCPA is a holding company that owns and invests in Media networks, and their investments are what give our shares value.
This is literally the meaning of "Holding Company". Google it.
Any attempt to argue this point should be sure to include how their stake in LPI is somehow different than all their other stakes.
UCPA is a shareholder in LPI, 5% stake...
I would not take this statement by a CEO of a company we do not control to mean our shares of UCPA will be dividend paying.
I find it much more likely that UCPA will receive the dividend.
Thats great for us, contributing cash to OUR shares value... not directly paying our shares dividends.
Yea, my snowflake game is unique. Untouchable, just like UCPA
I only invest in Cis Non-Binary tickers.
Only time can tell.
Only time can tell.
This was a hilarious comment. Actually laughed out loud.
We are anticipating the first financials that will detail the 5% OF LPI that UCPA aquired last year.
I see most of the same people that have been here for a long time now.
They post just as much as they seemed to before. Well, maybe a little more, but a stock they have been watching is finally making some moves, a reason to get excited.
There are new people but... maybe you are confusing the community with a "pump community marketing team"
This also feels like the right time to, again, mention that they are "penny stock exempt".
"net tangible assets greater than $2 million if they have been in operation at least three years or greater than $5 million if in operation less than three years. Securities of issuers with average revenue of at least $6 million for the last three years are also not considered penny stocks"
The company previously stated that the burden of fully reporting / auditing was too expensive to justify (at the time).
They said they will revisit the decision in the future "when it makes sense".
With the costs of having audited financial statements ranging from $20,000 to $50,000, this seems to make a lot of sense. This would be closer to the 50k mark, as they are an umbrella company, who owns other companies, more complex.
It might make the stock price rise temporarily, but it will not add to the companies profits... the actual bottom line. What was their profit in the last annual statement? What would the profit have been minus another 50k?
Answer these questions and you will see the reasoning behind dropping their reporting requirements.
I dont remember if this was in an email or in the newsletter.
Anyone with L2 know how many shares between our current level and 0.02?
I try to not get excited until the chicken actually hatches but it looks like support is forming, we have been holding pretty well.
Should be an interesting next few weeks.
Support comes when we put our money where our mouth is.
"Never invest more than you can afford to lose" - someone smart
While I would love to own more shares as well, and my position is not huge, I still invest slowly, each pay period as well.
Any big pile of money I end up with, I can normally devote to something pretty important, but not stocks.
I have put in what I can, when I can.
You have to view this all as relative.
2 people invest, one can afford 500, the other can afford 5000.
It runs 10x...
To the guy who could only afford 500, this gain feels like a windfall.
To the guy who could afford 5000, this feels like a windfall.
Because 1000% of your money is always 1000%. Making anything is more than who did not invest, and way more than those who lost money.
Its not pathetic that you dont shun your responsibilities to gamble, its being responsible; aka adulting.
I will continue to invest responsibly until UCPA becomes my golden goose, at that point I have earned the cash to be as irresponsible as I always wanted to be :)
I feel the need to drop by around once a year, just to see this board is doing.
Have long held UCPA (for 6 years now).
This is just a reminder that all the speculation on when this is going to run, is just that, speculation on when, not if.
We know it's going to happen, just dont know when.
And as a person who has been around that long, as time passes, it seems more and more likely.
I used to leave my sell orders posted at 0.10.
Since the LP announcement, I have adjusted those to each be 25% of holdings at .25, .35 and .50.
The rest... I'm saving just in case 'dollar land' becomes a real thing.
6 years in, still not worried.
Have some patience.
Revenue has a cost... if that rev goes away, so does the cost to achieve it.
1) nope
2) yup
3) yup
It doesn't get more technical than this.
It passes 2 rules, where it only needs one.
So while the share price is low, it is not technically a "penny stock"
This security is exempt from the definition of a Penny Stock under SEC under Rule 240.3a51-1 because it meets one of the following tests: 1) A price of over $5 per share, 2) the issuer has Average Revenue of at least $6 million for the last 3 years, or 3) the issuer has Net Tangible Assets in excess of $2 million if the issuer has been in continuous operations for at least 3 years or $5 million if less than 3 years.
Penny Stock Exempt
Go look at the OTC listing for UCPA... it is technically penny stock exempt. Do you know what that means?