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.
If your writings are to keep newbies informed your biasness should be left out, so as not to be miss interpeted.
I've heard of "your highness" but not "your biasness." And is that the lovely Miss Interpeted Noone, Hugh's sister?
Yeah, me too, but it's not a lot of dollar volume and it won't continue forever. I've seen plenty of other stocks that were stuck in a range until some catalyst blasted them out of it, and the past few years in particular have not been kind to .01-.02 stocks that don't pay to promote themselves.
Let's get some things straight.
A "forward" merger involves Company B (often a private company) merging into Company A (often a public company), with the shareholders of Company A remaining in control of the surviving (public) legal entity.
A reverse merger involves Company B (often a private company) merging into Company A (often a public company), with the shareholders of Company B (in this case, the formerly private company) ending up in control of the surviving (public) legal entity. RMGN is a recent example of a reverse merger, although SCGQU was a SPAC rather than a shell.
A reverse triangular merger is a specific type of reverse merger in which Company B forms a subsidiary to enter into the merger agreement. I've worked on all three of these types of transactions in my 30 years of legal practice.
So please do tell us why you believe that the "merger sub" would be critically important in the case of AASP.
"a cross-trade to yourself is completely legal if"
There is no "if." It is always illegal, as I said previously. Probably no one will notice if it's a small number of shares, but buying from yourself or selling to yourself is a "wash trade" which the SEC deems stock manipulation. Feel free, but you shouldn't go around telling other people to trust you that it's fine and legal.
Also, I think you simply misspoke on this, but your hypothetical AON order of 149 shares doesn't need an exact match to get filled. It won't display publicly (no AON order will, no matter the size), but an order for any number of shares at your price (or better) that exceeds your size and is routed to your broker will fill you.
That's a stretch.
"I hear that the Affordable Care Act is putting such a burden on health plans and health providers that many are just overwhelmed with adjusting to all the regulations and requirements."
It's true with regard to insurers. I think everyone is going to be stretched until the state health exchanges get up and running. They're supposed to be open by October 1 of this year to accept enrollments for January 1, 2014, and many insurers have a lot to do before then. Also, without getting into politics, let's just say that our elected representatives are not playing nicely with one another right now, which is gumming up the whole healthcare system.
Classic P&D from some of the usual suspects.
BNLB, if its earnings are legit and there's no other hidden problem that has been keeping its price around .10 for years, looks to me like one of those rare companies that do a reverse split for the right reasons. I would be very surprised to see a sell-off.
Also for the record... in case anyone other than you two guys and IHub Admin is reading this board :) I think the biggest problem is that the CEO of CYIO is a liar (proven fact) and incompetent (my opinion), as per my prior posts here over the years, rather than dilution (which is indeed always a possibility). The company's wondrous "NEW" product CYIPRO has been available for years, and they've never sold any of it. What does that say about their prospects for anything other than an occasional P&D spike? As long as the volumes remain low, there will be opportunities here, but for traders rather than investors.
If it doesn't bounce, there may be a Hugh and cry.
A close look at time and sales shows some pretty good-sized orders, a little after 12:15, 1:15 and 3:15, each of which cleaned out all the supply in a few-cent range. Not random speculators -- it was much more coordinated. I saw some large bids through ARCA, too. Maybe some small fund buying, or maybe someone does know something as a few of you have said.
If you look hard enough, I think you'll find some people who still believe that Elvis is alive.
US Fuel Corporation and Renewed World Energies Announce Algae Joint Venture
ATCO, N.J., April 29, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- US Fuel Corporation, (OTC: USFF), announced today a joint venture with Renewed World Energies, Inc. (RWE), a majority owned subsidiary of Aventura Equities, Inc. (OTC pink: AVNE), to integrate RWE's patent pending Photo bioreactor into US Fuel's coal-to-liquid (CTL) plants planned for Muhlenberg County and Perry County, Kentucky.
US Fuel's focus is engineering a proprietary template for constructing facilities capable of converting 300 tons of coal into approximately 525 barrels of synthetic liquid fuel a day. This proprietary US Fuel CTL process will include the ability to capture the carbon dioxide produced by the CTL process. Once captured, the carbon dioxide will be put to use to grow algae using the RWE Photo bioreactor.
"Ensuring that our facilities are environmentally friendly is critical to our business plan. With this joint venture, US Fuel will ensure that nearly all of the carbon dioxide generated during the CTL process is put to a good use, rather than emitted," said Harry Bagot, US Fuel President and CEO.
RWE is an industry leader, having created the world's first commercially viable, fully automated closed algae system capable of manufacturing algae oil. The RWE system circulates the water, nutrients, and CO2 required to grow the algae through the tank and panels, with the entire process continuously monitored and the growth environment automatically adjusted to maximize output.
When the algae are ready to harvest, an automated process sends the algae through multiple screening processes for final delivery to an oil processing plant. Algae products range from synthetic bio-fuel, algae cake for livestock feed, to raw materials used in the pharmaceutical, natural food and cosmetics industries.
The growth and cultivation of algae not only draws greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere and protects the environment, it will generate new revenue streams that serve to improve the bottom line profitability of US Fuel CTL operations.
According to Dr. Bruce R. Pratt, Director, Eastern Kentucky University Center for Renewable and Alternative Fuel Technologies (EKU CRAFT), "The process of growing algae and converting it to fuel is really just replicating what Mother Nature does in creating petroleum, except it does not take millions of years. Capturing the carbon dioxide from the CTL process reduces greenhouse gas emissions; using that carbon dioxide to create more fuel gives the process a double use for the gas."
As part of this joint venture, upon the commencement of construction of the first US Fuel CTL facility in Kentucky, RWE will locate its component manufacturing and spare parts distribution center in Kentucky, to co-locate with a planned US Fuel facility. The RWE system is designed for mass production, low cost, and easy assembly and will bring additional jobs to Kentucky while supporting the infrastructure for the new coal-to-liquids industry there.
"The RWE – US Fuel joint venture provides an opportunity for a truly large scale commercial application of our proven algae systems. We are excited about locating operations in Kentucky, creating local jobs as part of profitable algae operations and the opportunities to continue research and process improvement in coordination with institutions such as EKU CRAFT," stated Richard Armstrong, President of RWE.
About US Fuel Corporation
US Fuel Corporation (OTC: USFF) designs, builds, owns and operates scalable facilities that will convert coal into high quality liquid fuels, including ultralow sulfur diesel and jet fuel. www.usfuelcorporation.com
About Renewed World Energies
Renewed World Energies is the developer of a proprietary technology for use in the manufacturing of algae oil and a lead supplier of products and services associated with such manufacturing and the sale of products derived from algae oil. www.rwenergies.com
Disclaimer: Forward Looking Statements
This release contains statements relating to future results which are forward-looking statements. These statements are not historical facts and are not guaranteed, but instead represent only the good faith belief of US Fuel management as of the date of this release. Future events are by their nature inherently uncertain and outside of US Fuel's control. It is possible that US Fuel's actual results and financial condition may differ, possibly materially, from the anticipated results and financial condition indicated in these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this release are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of securities laws in force as of the date of this release. US Fuel does do not undertake any obligation to publicly update or correct any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that subsequently occur or of which we hereafter become aware.
Contact at US Fuel:
Paul F. Adams
Chief Operating Officer
856 753 1046
padams@usfuelcorporation.com
www.USFuelCorporation.com
Contact at Renewed World Energies
Richard Armstrong
President
803-230-8487
ricka@rwenergies.com
www.rwenergies.com
SOURCE US Fuel Corporation
Calm before the storm. All it will take is for some email newsletter to make it an uncompensated pick, which could happen at any time. They're always looking for subpennies that are profitable (pretty damn rare) or have a good story. With EIPC, they'd have both. Look at what happened this morning with MGLT, a little solar company I used to follow.
The buy orders are being routed to and executed by market makers other than the one with that ask displayed.
hh, I've been posting on this board since 2009 and first owned EIPC a few years before that, so I share your impatience (even though I've been in and out of the stock many times over the years). I'll second what Ted said about simpler explanations being best and will also reiterate that in my view, small investors need not worry that dark forces are working against them (at least on this particular security). With sustained growth will come higher stock prices, eventually, but in the meantime EIPC's business and future prospects are not being harmed by the low stock price.
DMRJ's goal is to keep their position manageable, not drive the stock price down. Eventually, as the size of their position decreases and interest in the company and its stock increase, demand will begin to exceed supply and the stock price will go up. I know this is hard for some people to accept, but it is what it is. Basic supply and demand.
Not a pump, but some pretty powerful Kool-Aid (I own a LOT of the stock, but still, wow...):
DW, I hope you read this. After watching the trading patterns of XXXX for quite some time, it seems a reasonable educated guess that this company's stock is indeed being manipulated. Most likely culprits are a consortium posing as individual traders with the dark intent of suppressing XXXXXX's green technologies. Think about it -- batteries and ultracapacitors for cutting edge renewable energy storage and game-changing propulsion of electric vehicles (cars, trucks, motorcycles, planes, trains, etc.) -- an awakened world that embraces green technology would send Big Oil spinning on its arse. I've referred this matter to my attorney for investigation of repeated matched trades and steady accumulation. My Dad was a wealthy shipping agent who worked for a billionaire industrialist -- I was the black sheep who joined the working class in solidarity, and because we're the ones who can clean up and rebuild our Earth. After all, a start-up company whose subsidiary XXX XXXX secured a highly prized Phase II National Science Foundation grant, and has posted four straight ever-increasing quarterly revenues should be trading above five cents a share, no? Excuse the rant, I get tired of the same old brainwashed mainstream bullshit day after day.
I'll refrain from commenting on most of that, except to note that when a company is running profitably and has no immediate need to access the equity markets for financing, the company's stock price on a given day has very little to do with its business operations. Manipulating the trading in the stock, if it were to occur, would not harm the company or "suppress its technologies."
You nailed it.
b9, we don't disagree often (and maybe not this time, either), but I think it would have shown bad taste for the company to put anything out today. Flyonthewall did some of the work for IMSC, and there will be more than enough press to go around pretty soon.
Agreed on the "test run," too. If DMRJ has been lightening up their position lately, why wouldn't they use today as an opportunity to continue to do so? But there has been a lot of buying from new eyes on the company over the past two days, and that buying will eventually overwhelm the selling.
Can you show all of us the proof you have of manipulation today?
I don't doubt that there was some short-selling. That's what makes a market. But "manipulation" is a strong accusation that should be backed up with FACTS that I'm pretty sure don't exist.
SC, just to clarify my point...
I wrote: "there's an individual buyer and an individual seller on every trade"
You replied: "That is simply not true with "micro-cap" Market Makers! Their shorting practices and other suggestive data dictate otherwise"
I agree that some [many] market makers can and do short stocks that are going up, in the name of "creating liquidity," and can squash down the trading price of a stock that is running -- and then cover later. Easy money.
HOWEVER... I see no evidence of anything improper in EIPC's trading yesterday, or any day, except maybe when it ran over .05 in 2011. For THIS STOCK, at this time, there is indeed an individual buyer and an individual seller on every trade. That should actually make EIPC longs feel BETTER, because why would any individual investor want to wage war against shorting market makers? Anyone in his right might would not, because the individual is going to lose that war. Fortunately, if tripl7z and everyone else continue to buy more shares of the stock than other people sell, the price will go up. It is just that simple.
You're also correct that reading Level II is often misleading, for the reason that I described last night on that one particular trade. The market maker's quote is almost always updated BEFORE the trade that created the change hits the tape, so it is often not obvious whether the trade was at the bid, or the ask, or in the middle. That is not "manipulation," and it's not restricted to IHub's "Trades" page -- it's just that IHub is at fault because they insist on labeling something as a Buy or a Sell based on whether the trade price is closer to the bid or closer to the ask at the exact time the trade prints, without regard to what the quote was a few seconds EARLIER. The solution to the problem is simply to look back at where the quote was right before the trade to see whether the trade was at the bid or ask or in-between, if it matters to you.
C'mon, SC, you're putting way too much faith in IHub's primitive Trades chart. Also, there's an individual buyer and an individual seller on every trade, so what difference does it really make whether IHub calls it a Buy or a Sell?
For the record, #5 was a trade at the offer when the quote was .0089 x .009, 100 x 400, but by the time the trade posted a few seconds later the .009 offer was gone. (Those 40,000 offered shares had just been bought.) The quote was .0089 x .01 by the time the .009 printed, and all the IHub algorithm knows is that the trade was closer to the bid than to the offer as of the exact second it printed, so IHub called the trade a Sell even though it was really at the offer.
But no matter which way you look at trade #5, one guy sold 40,000 at .009 and one guy bought at .009. Nothing whatsoever to do with market makers except that the MMs handled the two individuals' orders. Market makers don't indicate whether trades are "buys" or "sells" - they just print the trades, and IHub's flawed algorithm does the rest.
#7, #8 and #9 were all trades at the bid (but there was a real live buyer for those, too!). I didn't notice or don't remember what the quote was immediately before trade #6 posted.
I agree.
BTW, most of the people here do not know who you are, but let me just say that if you're pleased, I am pleased :)
"the CC did confirm a few things in which I've written about. DMRJ is selling shares, no doubt now about that"
Well, yeah, of course. Most of those on this board have agreed on that for a long time now. It is just the way things work and not a reflection on the company's prospects.
I disagree on all counts.
"Bravo to Glenn and Implant for having the call and attempting to address investors concerns."
Exactly right. They didn't need to do it, or spend 1:15 on it (that's a long call), but obviously someone over there is keeping an eye on stockholder sentiment.
What's the matter, you weren't impressed by the guy who asked the CEO if he knows why the stock price dropped at a certain time during the day? Sheesh.
I thought Glenn and the others were extremely patient and professional (and not "worn out" or "put out" as some here have said), and they said everything that I would have expected given legal and competitive constraints. I just doubled my position this morning. Thanks very much to all you weak hands!
You win! That must be the W Team, as in WTF?!
Not likely.
Wow, that is more like the L team. Losers.
Sounds right. Another oddity: the 200,000 bid through ARCA, earlier at .85 and just now at .95. Not the most logical way to accumulate a large position, if that were what was really intended.
"Just the legal review and editing of contractual documents can sometimes take weeks, if not months"
Yep, for sure. But don't pin it all on the lawyers :) - it's also a near certainty that multiple reviews and approvals will be required from different departments within the company making the purchase.
b9, I agree, and your point about a stock's price tending to move to where there's volume is a great one. But y'know what? Back to the "manipulation" theme... even though we both just got finished saying that there's been no manipulation today, this stock has been very thin lately. And obviously traders and market makers make their money by buying and selling (or selling and buying). Sometimes when the trading volume in a stock dries up, it appears that some trader, or group of traders, will hit a few bids (or take out a few offers) to try to guide the stock price into a new trading range, a few cents lower or higher than the previous one, where there will be more volume for them to trade with.
Is that part of what happened this morning? There's no way to tell, but "maybe." Still, I wouldn't call that "manipulation" in the sense of "Let's drive down the price of IMSC!"
Yep, just some selling (and an equal amount of buying, of course), with not the slightest indication of manipulation. Some people seem to think that almost any time a stock drops it's being manipulated, but invariably they can't quite explain how it's being done, or for what logical purpose.
That's not to say that manipulation of thinly traded stocks never occurs -- it's quite common, no matter where the stock is traded. But it's not what we're seeing today with IMSC.
I think the dividend talk is even more ridiculous than the short conspiracy, but it looks like neither one will be put to rest until the company goes private or BK.
I haven't owned this stock in a few years. In my personal opinion, based on my experience with the company circa 2007-2009, the CEO is incompetent at best and a recidivist liar, so I would NEVER own CYIO except very briefly for a quick trade.
That stock is a bizarre story. Am I missing any steps?
1. Start by calling yourself "Jedi Mind, Inc."
2. Release preposterous claims.
3. Get threatened by Lucasfilm Ltd. and change name to "Mind Technologies."
4. Repeat Step 2.
5. Dilute the crap out of it.
6. Pass "assets" to another company.
7. Repeat Step 2.
8. Repeat Step 5.
Yep, the stock price jumped because of a one-day email/text/Twitter pump with nothing substantive behind it, so now it's just finding its back to where it was before that. This is exactly what I said would happen -- see my prior posts.