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.
Sometimes it hurts to sell into strength, until it's on its way back down and it makes you feel like you should have sold more. Think of your shares as an inventory. You can let go of some at high prices, and if you are wrong about selling you still hold more. If you are right about selling at least you sold some and can get those shares back cheaper. Your inventory should expand and contract in this way, plus you will be a market stabilizer because you buy when nobody wants to buy and sell when nobody wants to sell. You have to use the charts to pick your price points and you won't always be right. I expanded my position again at 0066, but we continued to sell off. My next purchase was at 0024, but for twice as much. The shares bought at 0066 hurts, but my average is somewhere in between. Had another bid at 0021, but low was 0022. The pain goes both ways - hurt when I sold at 0073 on the way up and when I bought at 0066 on the way down. This is why you do it in stages. People talk about accumulation (I'm buying more here because it's cheap), but don't forget about distribution (I'm selling some here because it's expensive). Just my 2 pennies.
PS: obviously know your budget, too. Trading shares exponentially can be dangerous. IE: 100,000 at 0005, 200,000 at 0002, 500,000 at 0001, and then the stock is at 0000 for ten years with a 100% loss on all your shares. No guarantee any stock will "come back"
in the least I hope the parent will throw P&E work at them from the assets the parent owns so PGPM can book some cash flow. It only makes sense for Raffy's other holdings to do anything they can to help PGPM because he stands to gain so much if PGPM stock appreciates. He owns so much of it. Raffy, just get it done dammit!
Well max shrs in this option/warrant/convertible deal (whatever it is) would have to be no more than 848MM due to AS, but it would be nice to know the rest of the info on this deal so we know the overhang
Options, warrants, or convertible bonds/notes, yes. But what are the terms? Optionable/convertible at what price for how many shares? It would be nice to know the details, but we don't.
Well, we did already bounce off the 200 day EMA today and I hope we don't test it.
Yeah, those 3 boxes checked under item 9...
The filings, the transfer agent, and investor relations all have a different answer for outstanding shares. What is going on here?
Hmmmm, still not happy. 1.6 billion is still more than the 1.152 billion we were assuming from the recent filings. Seems we get a different answer depending on what day of the week it is.
That filing shows 1.152 Billion outstanding. Where's the link to Rain's email?
Just to add one more thing: if it is known that unexercised warrants exist and have the potential to be exercised, it is referred to as "market overhang" because it is a cloud of potential dilution hanging over the stock. This could put a lid on the price or downward pressure. I've yet to catch up with today's events on this stock because I'm on vacation, but I did mention in an earlier post that the $3MM investor wasn't going to put the money up without something in return. People are throwing the "D" word around today (dilution). Maybe we're seeing it from the 3 million dollar man? The filing did mention convertibles or something like that. The only scenario arguing against this theory that I can think of is the $3mm investor already had a significant stake (ie: skin in the game, like Pinedo) and such a cash infusion would be non-dilutive by way of a token amount of shares exchangeable for the money (ie: $3,000,000 for 100 shares at par value of $0.0001). The motivation for the investment is that their existing shares would appreciate from the cash infusion and its benefits to the company. Ha! Not sure this has ever been done in the history of investing, but it's all I got that jibes with the company's statement refuting dilution had occurred. The $3mm filing just doesn't disclose the details, so we just don't know...
Ha! Thanks, Bob. Good stuff!
There's pressure on the broad market right now
That was 2006 and oil was ~$80 and climbing to a high of $160 in 2008 which was followed by a precipitous crash to $25 shortly after the peak. With the financial crisis and low oil prices my guess is they just couldn't get any money and oil wasn't worth recovering at that price. So, here we are today. Oil is in the mid $40s with predictions of up to $60 within a year - I'll take forecasts with a grain of salt. But, I'm guessing maybe the oil recovery tech has at least improved somewhat in the last decade. Couple that with the $3,000,000 cash injection and they seem to be in a better position. Maybe they're dumping shares, maybe they're not and Raffy wants his 600MM shares to appreciate by adding value to the business. We'll see...
OK, thanks. Haven't been active in the pennies or on ihub for 7 years until my position in PGPM recently "woke up" and surprised me with a windfall. I'll check the recent posts for the details on GERS.
Looks to be somewhere around $2.5 million. I calculated $2.65MM using the formula in the Nasdaq link, but I didn't see any treasury stock. It doesn't look like the company ever bought back any shares, so that would explain no treasury stock. They do have a line called "Additional Paid-In Capital" which is where I'm seeing $2.53MM, as opposed to my calculation of $2.65MM. Like I said, looks to be around $2.5MM paid into the company by stock purchases from offerings.
Edit: or it could be both those numbers combined. I don't know!
https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/finance-dictionary/what-is-additional-paid-in-capital-APIC
That's Paid-in Capital:
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/how-to-calculate-a-paid-in-capital-balance-sheet-formula-or-equation-cm572502
Let's see if we can figure it out from the filings...
Ha! Thanks, Bob. Back at ya!
Hey guys. What's going on with this company? My shares disappeared from my account May 22. I had like 20 shares. It started as 1000 shrs in 2007, but reverse split, bag holder, yadda, yadda.
Hopefully. That article refers to the parent company which has almost the exact name, so the deal doesn't directly relate to PGPM. The hope/speculation is that Raffy will merge the parent company, Pilgrim Petroleum PLC (a U.K. Company), with Pilgrim Petroleum Corp (PGPM stock).
I got my first follow today. Was that you, Bob?!
There's a link to Nasdaq.com in Gainsday's sticky, but it seems to be broken. Here's a link to Yahoo!'s institutional investor page:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PGPM/holders?p=PGPM
This fund manager put his balls on the table and bought a whole $20 worth of PGPM (100,000 shares at $0.0002)
Hey, where's the document showing the percent ownership info? I remember reading it in one of the filings or something, but I can't find it again. Anyone have a link?
Thanks, ski. I'll check the sticky. I suppose if Raffy has controlling interest in the private company then he can fold it into PGPM even if there are partners who disagree. Just saying we don't know much about the parent, but I'm not hugely concerned about it. A merge would be a good thing if everything is all good with the private company (i.e. Finances in order, low debt, substantive assets, etc). Checking the sticky now...
"it's FUN!!"
That much is true!
I agree. I don't think it's a bad thing. I just wasn't able to find too much about the private company. If Raffy has partners in the private company, then maybe THEY don't have a stake in PGPM and don't want money moving out of the private company and into PGPM because they don't get anything out of it. But, that's just as speculative and I'm not presenting it as fact. I'm just going to concede that I don't know what they don't tell us and simply wait for the story to unfold while I hold my shares.
I mean for all we know it could have been Raffy who personally injected the $3,000,000, but I don't think the filing revealed who the investor was. Certainly, if Raffy feels he can amplify his gains by doing something like that, then I guess he would. It would have to appreciate the stock he owns more than if he just kept the $3,000,000 in his pocket. He owns something like 600MM shares (60% of outstanding, right?), so his stake appreciates by $3MM every half penny the stock goes up! So I guess yeah there is huge incentive for him to have PGPM succeed as a stock.
I guess it depends how generous the parent is with the children! Some parents are more generous than others. As a shareholder of PGPM, Raffy would certainly stand to gain from being generous to PGPM via the private company, but I won't speculate on that. I'll wait and see what happens.
That's news related to the confusingly named Pilgrim Petroleum PLC, which is the priavately owned parent of Pilgrim Petroleum Corp (PGPM stock). Those business deals have everything to do with the private company, in my opinion, and not necessarily the stock PGPM.
Now, Raffy appears to be at least one of the owners of the private company. He is also a shareholder of PGPM. I don't presume to know what that connection means to PGPM, so we'll just have to wait for the company to inform us on that. I do believe that in the least it means that Pilgrim Petroleum PLC's assets are not PGPM's assets, since the private company is the parent (i.e. the child serves the parent, not the other way around).
On its own, and if you believe the numbers put forth in the filings, PGPM has oil assets with a net present value of around $7.26M (just under the current market cap of $8.07M) and some sort of investment asset (the total reserves, maybe?) worth $48.9M. Not sure of the relationship between these 2 numbers, but maybe they expect 7 years to get all $48.9M worth of oil out of the ground ($7M x 7 years = $48.9M ???). The NPV is a discounted number and I'm not an accountant, but as I understand it the number basically represents a portion of the total value because the asset will not be fully recovered instantaneously. The latest 10-Q discusses the NPV under "Reserves" on page 9 and here's what it says:
And where's the evidence of this "disruptive corporate action" at PGPM? What does that even mean? Is Raffy blocking traffic or harassing the pigeons at the local park?
I hope so! I remember learning somewhere that rallies end with a bang and selloffs end with a whimper, so that fits with declining volume. Crossing my fingers...
I just posted that I bought 250k...it got filled in 6 smaller blocks. Seems like the small players are selling.
Bought 250k shrs this morning, took 6 separate blocks to complete the single order.
Sheesh, have a few drinks...or maybe you have already. One down day 20% and you're bouncing off the walls. You do realize that this stock has run from 0.0001 to 0.0200, right? Looked at another way in regular stock terms, it's like a $1.00 stock running up to $200. Ok, now it's back at $100, but it's still $99 above the low. Yeah, it's painful to have retracements like this, but you shouldn't listen to anybody for advice on YOUR stock position. I've held shares in this for 11 years and I sold most of it in the third week of May taking advantage of the strength at the time it was there. Still holding 30% of my stake and trying to be real greedy with it, but regardless of what anyone says here or anywhere else there are no guarantees in the stock market. Every time you purchase shares in a company, I don't care if it is PGPM or AAPL, you could potentially lose all of your money. Companies that were once titans of their industry have disappeared into the history books. Obviously not all of them and I don't pretend that PGPM and AAPL are in the same caliber of companies, but you had to know that a stock selling for a fraction of a penny is that cheap for a reason, right? Shareholders are giving Raffy a chance and whether he makes good on it is up to him, but there's never a guarantee of success.
If the earnings show a gain then it is reported as "unrealized gains" according to the filings. This is because they have not retrieved or sold any of the oil in the ground. Taxes on the unrealized gains are specified as "deferred" in the filings because no product has been sold -- remember they have not extracted the oil yet. They are basically reporting the value of their investment, which is the oil in the ground. As the price of oil fluctuates, so does the value of their investment. It seems that they are reporting the change in value as unrealized gains or unrealized losses when they file the quarterly/annual reports. If they reported "earnings," it's only because the price of oil increased since the quarterly report that came before it. If they reported "losses," it's only because the price of oil decreased since the quarterly report that came before it. It would be like reporting your gain in PGPM stock as earnings even though you never sold any shares. I guess it's just a way for them to "showcase" the value of the investment because they don't have any revenues yet. I mean, I'm not thrilled about owning stock for 11 years in an oil company that doesn't produce any oil, but as I understand it the situation has changed and the oil they have the rights to can be extracted now and hopefully going forward they can finally get their drill bit wet.
Ha! Oldie but goody, that band. You put a bug in my ear! I'm asking Alexa to play their songs right now!
"99" means there are 99 shares short - period. It does not mean there are 99 short for every long. Look at "days to cover" which is based on shares short and average daily volume. Even days to cover is somewhat misleading. Apparently if there were 1 single share short, it would report that it takes 1 day to cover the position.
Do this: Click on the "Short Interest" column to sort the list by short interest and look at the row at the top. April 15, 2009 there were 1,835,139 shares short, avg daily vol of 1,257,345, and the amount of days to cover is 1.46.
http://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/PGPM/short-sales
It's a 160 bagger! It traded at .0001 5 weeks ago. Crazy to think about it.
Why do you guys leave out the last letter in the symbols? I've seen it done on quite a few stocks mentioned here.
No more stock dividends, please! We don't want more shares issued
Ha, I remember those days! I was a recipient of that dividend. I had 700 shares at avg $0.06