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.
I'm a little late reading this. I'm a former JAQC holder and still following the board, but I only traded it and am not waiting for stock unless someone wants to give me some :)
So it's two out of three.
10 days with no posts here so I'll just chime in to say that I'll be interested in seeing the results of this one, since I respect your opinion as well as slo's.
I don't see where ANYONE on this board has said ANY of those things.
Of course that was no coincidence. Thanks for posting -- it's a relief to see a logical consensus developing here. I thought I was in the Twilight Zone for awhile.
Very nice. That's expressed a slightly different way but it makes perfect sense and I completely agree.
Hear, hear! No fund, no matter how large, is going to allocate an unlimited amount to any one investment. It's just one of the alternative theories until we get an official statement from someone at DMRJ (and we will be waiting a long time for that), but so much more plausible than the "mass retail investor panic beginning abruptly at 2:15 PM yesterday" theory. I welcome other theories, and there are even several variations of the ones that you and I have laid out, but vague and unsupported "manipulation" and "paid basher" allegations will be treated with the derision they deserve.
You spelled Harry's name wrong. He is a friend of mine -- we worked on several qui tam cases together, long before Madoff was exposed.
"delaney?...your guess?"
Hmmm, we have a miscommunication here. DLNY was NOT shorting IMSC for its own account, if that's what you think I was suggesting. On the Pinks, market makers virtually always simply represent the orders of buyers and sellers.
There have been about 10-12 people posting here regularly the past few days, and it appears to me that several of us have pretty much figured out what has been going on with the trading. It is aggravating for longs, but not all that unusual. I suggest you try to weigh the competing theories and see who you think is correct. Then, if the 5-6 of us are right, the answer will be forthcoming within a few days.
I will just ask you one thing. When (and why) would your hypothetical competitor have purchased the hundreds of thousands of shares with which it hit the bids? That's real shares being sold, not short selling.
You seem like a pretty sharp guy, like a lot of people on this board. I guess next time you'll think twice before asking the opinion of someone who apparently thinks that a million shares suddenly hitting the bids in waves over the course of six trading hours all came from retail investors who got disillusioned at exactly the same time, and who believes that "paid bashers" are working their dastardly deeds on little IMSC.
Personally, I'd sooner believe in the Easter Bunny.
I don't know. Maybe they paid off the debt that had more onerous terms, knowing that they'd be able to raise funds on better terms after the approval came in?
I guess we should find out soon enough. Whoever sold it down to 1.17 appears to be finished for the moment.
Well, if that's true, they definitely need an infusion of new cash to build all that product to fill the new orders :)
Yes, I am definitely missing whatever the point of that post was, since I don't frequent the Yahoo board. I don't know who wrote it or to whom it was directed.
There are a number of people on this board who know me, some personally, and the limit of my self-imposed responsibility here is to be honest to them.
I think for the next several months they'll be using all their available cash to build product to fill orders.
It has to be below the print at 10:45:03.
Here's a hypothetical conversation, based on actual situations in which I've been personally involved in my legal career (not involving IMSC). I will leave it to you guys to fill in the missing pieces.
Company to financier: Gee, guys, we are about to be inundated with new orders and we're going to need a lot of cash to build all that product.
Financier: That's great! Our stake in your company will become much more valuable. Where are you going to get all that cash?
Company: Can't you guys invest more?
Financier: Oh, no, we already have an outsized stake in your company. We can't tie up any more of our capital, UNLESS... we can sell some of what we already own into the public market, and then buy more directly from your company at a discount to the market price.
Company: Sounds good to me!
Thanks for calling me "beloved," Dr. E (may I ask, in which field or discipline did you receive your doctorate?). I bought my first shares of IMSC soon after the stock price jumped from .03 to .11. I was completely out of the stock for quite some time, but I bought back in upon TSA approval and have been adding shares at these low levels.
I don't have time to get into any further debates with you, or the European guy and his followers, as to who is selling. Also, I'm not privy to the market makers' trading logs so I can't say for 100% certain. However, there are a limited number of parties that own[ed] hundreds of thousands of shares that they could sell on the bid (meaning that most of it wasn't shorting), so it is not difficult to come up with an informed speculation.
But you are right: for sure, the waves of selling today were not driven by retail investors.
"the manipulation is staggering"
Can you give us a specific example of what you think was "manipulation" today? All I saw was 800,971 shares bought and sold.
Yep. Lots of people to feed and the company many soon have a very busy group of cooks.
Yep, no question that the dilution is priced in. The company is trading based on the fully diluted share count plus their current level of business. It'll take a couple of large orders to break out of the current share price range, and they are coming.
"I will hold strong and hope that those in charge issue new shares in an orderly fashion if they must in order to cover debt"
I don't think you understand the capital structure of this company. I suggest you read their SEC filings to understand why the authorized shares were increased, and how DMRJ can convert the debt. This is not the typical type of "dilution" to which penny stock investors have a knee-jerk reaction.
"there are reloading offers of 100 shares which never draw and create brick walls to price appreciation, a point made by satellite."
Where did I say that?!
"we WERE BEING SHORTED THE DAY OF ..IN FACT 43%"
I'm not going to get into this debate again, but this statement is a misinterpretation of the daily "short volume" numbers. See my prior posts. Intraday "short volume" is not the same as "short interest."
Once again, you're right on the money in my view - especially here:
"I am not saying Platinum is selling, what I am saying is if there is an entity that has a reason to sell (or short) – it only can be Platinum. No one else would short this stock as a long term play as some posters suggest."
They're not selling out their position, but I don't begrudge them their right to lighten up if they choose to do so for whatever reason. And if weak-kneed retail investors get nervous and sell, Platinum could even buy back lower if they wanted to.
"maybe they need to free up some capital for other investments."
This has been known to happen!
"Just the way the game is played. Happens all the time with these little companies."
Yep. That is what financing sources do. I have dealt with enough of them in my career to know how they operate, and others on this board can believe me or not as they choose. I don't have "proof," nor am I going to spend any time worrying about it. It doesn't mean that DMRJ has lost confidence in Implant.
DMRJ is not "selling" -- they are "hedging" (because they have an outsized position in the stock that may exceed their comfort zone, and just because they CAN) and trading. I suggest watching DLNY for clues because they appear to be involved.
I'm pretty sure that DMRJ will know before any of us when a big order has been received. In the meantime, let them do their hedging and trading and try not to worry about it, if you have the courage of your convictions.
I don't disagree with what seems to be a consensus building here on what's happening with the trading of the stock. I'll just stress that obviously DMRJ is not in business to make money for small retail investors, so if their hedging shakes out some weak hands, so be it. And Implant doesn't mind because they're not using the current stock price as currency.
Well, it's obvious that there's nothing "simple" about you! As far as NY is concerned, I don't think it's a question of acceptance or rejection of a filing. If a submission is bounced as "unfile-able" for some technical reason, it is simply returned to the submitter and it's as though it was never submitted. I'm sure it's not logged into their computer system in any way, so the clerk(s) with whom you spoke would not have seen any evidence of it -- and/or would not have given out any information to a random caller for confidentiality reasons. (See, you're not simple, but you were definitely random.)
One more small point:
"Since the merger agreement explicitly stated that the merger is effective when filed in NY, I suppose that some will argue that all they had to do was submit the paperwork."
As you can gather from the above, "submission" is not "filing" until it is accepted.
Without spending any time looking at this, I will speculate that they submitted it and had the filing rejected due to some technical problem. This is not at all unusual in NY, speaking from personal experience filing corporate documents. It doesn't even necessarily indicate blatant incompetence, although of course there is plenty of other evidence of that here.
"And the debt to DMRJ is convertible at a fixed price - so they have no incentive to bring the stock down."
Correct. They are not concerned with the current stock price. That means that if they feel they need to hedge their position, they will do so.
I would point out that the trades that pushed the price down a bit this morning were virtually all at the bid, so the culprits were obviously not those mythical evil naked shorters. You can't sell short on the bid.
Bravo. Great post.
I've got mine. We need a new catalyst....
In my view, the stock's chart is simply a convenient representation of small investor sentiment. "Support" in this case means that $1.45 was a price at which some people would consider the stock a good value, and below which few people would be likely to sell *at this time* -- so I agree with you that it was a worthy observation. And for this morning, anyway, you nailed it.
Technical analysis doesn't really work well anymore for large-cap stocks whose trading is largely driven by institutions, at volumes that generally overwhelm what the small fry can generate, but it can be a useful tool here. Those who prefer to discount the reality of the stock price and trend at any given moment, perhaps in favor of misinterpreted data and conspiracy theories, are welcome to do so.
Good answer b9. BTW those who were wondering when we'd start to see institutional buying might want to sneak a peak at today's time and sales at 12:08:20.
There is no aftermarket trading in the Pinks. Prints after the close are always from during market hours. I wouldn't worry about individual prints, anyway, if you're confident with the story. The stock price is going to bounce around.
Not obvious at all, and not safe to assume anything. There have been fake-outs before.
Yep, for sure. WUHN had a similar move today. I had noticed last week that there is increasing life at this end of the market, with a couple of movers almost every day, but today is exceptional. Still, it seems to take a newsletter pump to get these things moving.
Nice chart move on steady ask-side volume.
Ridiculous. Not a chance in hell.
MKRS was an uncompensated pump by both James Connelly ("PennyStockProphet") and Epic Stock Picks.