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.
Right - the nature and payback period of the loan suggests that both parties are confident the borrower will be able to pay it back promptly, possibly because both parties know the prospective timing of revenue related to whatever is being developed.
One further thought on this - assuming that the borrower is going to sell something and get paid net 30 or net 60, that would imply their sales occur before Feb 28 or Jan 31 respectively. That would give them the required capital to repay the loan on time. This looks to me like another indicator that we are very close.
10Ks look back into a period completed 45 days ago. We were never going to here about the merger by way of a 10K.
One more thing about retail shorts - neither longs nor professional shorts give a damn about them.
They are like bugs on the windshield. Some of them make a lot of noise, but in the end they neither stop the car nor propel it...
jumping in here - the question is not what % of shorts are professional, but rather what % of the short interest is "pros" vs retail.
My educated guess would be that there are a lot of retail/amateur shorts who collectively account for only a small percentage of the short interest.
If and when DBMM ever goes to Nasdaq we certainly won't hear about it by way of quarterly financials filing. It would be in a PR. Financials are backward looking at published 45 days after the quarter end.
I have had that happen to me many times. Don't know how many shares your order was for. If your original order was for the "minimum" number of shares required to be shown on L2, and the MM wanted to control what showed on L2, then filling you for one share makes sense from their standpoint. If not, well sometimes I think MMs do this just to spite retailers.
That's the way I read it. A very short lock-up period.
I hope they don't. The worst thing DBMM could do as this point is speculate regarding the internal workings or timeline of OTC Markets. They should let OTC Markets make the announcement (via publication on the "Daily List") just like they do for hundreds of other stocks. The sooner DBMM stops being "special" the better we will be.
Actually, from a timing standpoint the day after Thanksgiving would be perfect. It is a very thin (and short?) trading day.
As long as we're talking pie in the sky dreams it might as well be cherry pie and clear cloudless skies! :)
Hi!
Which crypto instruments would you recommend if one was bargain-hunting with a long term perspective?
TIA
Joe
I did exactly that on past calls
I agree with you that SHMP needs to focus on what the BUSINESS would look like, including a deep understanding of their costs (unless they intend to go to a pretty much full-on licensing model) rather than operate a medium-scale aquaculture science project.
What IS possible, or seems so to me, is that a big player could arrange with their broker to short the common (unregistered) using their registered shares as collateral against the short. I can't do that, you can't do that, but I suspect that a big player could work something like that out with their broker or the original underwriter of the restricted offering. In that event the O/S would not change and the float would not change, but there would be sell-side volume in the free-trading shares.
If I were an underwriter for an offering of registered (restricted) shares, I would make sure my big clients knew AT THE TIME OF THE OFFERING that my firm could provide workarounds that would allow them a measure of liquidity if needed before the registration came off their restricted shares. I have no personal experience with this, but it seems like a natural way for an underwriter to make some additional income from their big clients (and retain them).
Who that would be that would be doing this or what their motivation would be is another question - one for which I don't have an answer.
My hope is that LWLG has at least a little control over "when" things start to happen and they wanted to get the Q out (KISS principle - no subsequent events) before the "great unveil" so that management could focus on that when the time comes.
Not a prediction.
EDIT: Of course, LWLG, and LWLG investors, would prefer sooner rather than later. Just thinking that they might have had a situation where it wasn't going to be September or October, so if it has to be November may as well be after we file the Q.
I would think it would be QIND.
All of that is true, but I think it misses the point of the small San Antonio deployment. My guess is that is a "proof of concept" to see what kind of demand there is for their shrimp in a retail direct-to-consumer location as opposed to growing shrimp for retail chains to sell pre-packaged, or mail order, or in bulk to casinos (Vegas). Clearly that nominal revenue does not justify SHMP's market cap.
The real key is whether they can profitably scale the business given access to the working capital required to grow it. That is what the SPAC deal provides. Whether they can be successful remains to be seen, but if they fail it no longer will be due to being under-capitalized.
I still expect some further price weakness into year end and before the deal closes.
Right - that is what I really meant. Not that LWLG was buying something, but that they were partnering with an entity that needed working capital to fulfill their part of the partnership.
I saw that - it is a good sign.
The loan clearly suggests that LWLG (which has cash on hand, and ready access to more through LPC if needed) is working with some entity that needs cash RIGHT NOW to do something for LWLG. Far quicker and easier for LWLG to lend them that cash than for that entity to go out to the markets to raise it.
Usually property and equipment would be a long term asset, not a current asset.
I think a million is about two orders of magnitude too high.
The QIND balance sheet shows a very large part of the current assets as "other Current Assets". Anyone have any idea what this consists of? TIA
The QIND balance sheet shows a very large part of the current assets as "other Current Assets". Anyone have any idea what this consists of? TIA
In general, the size of the spread is inversely proportional to the level of interest in the stock. If there were more interest, either buying or selling, another MM would jump over the bid or under the ask seen on L2 and the spread would narrow.
Another way of saying this which resonated with me when I heard it (not my original line) is that "liquidity is the probability that the next trade will be at the same price as the last trade". VDRM is an illiquid stock. The last trade price is in no way predictive of the next trade price.
Expecting? None.
Hoping for? Amazon sales, state licenses, deals with HMOs and hospitals etc.
I share your frustrations.
It's an otc stock with a big spread. If more people cared the spread would be narrower. In the absence of substantial and sustained demand it is reasonable to expect the bid to fall.
Speaking for myself, VDRM is not a compelling buy at that .0072 bid, let alone on the ask. They will need to show true revenues and the ability to scale up for me to buy any more. I have some shares from long ago (now at a loss) that are not really worth selling. I am holding and hoping, but my conviction is that the price is low because of the company's internal weaknesses, not because of manipulation.
I am not saying I like the process. I am, however, convinced there is nothing I can do to speed it up. That means my options are bail or wait. I will wait.
Hey, big spender...
Low volume is fact.
Manipulation is speculation or opinion.
I doubt VDRM is manipulated as very few people know of it and fewer care about it.,
Your post would make sense if OTC Markets was a single person working an 8 hour day.
I do agree we need to have some patience.
Not to me. To each his own.
I like everything about that post except the "just saying" at the end. That is the stupidest meme out there.
Putting ".50 to $2" in all your posts is really annoying.
It is spelled "gaping"
He's not the king, not even a prince. Certainly he is nothing to get excited about.
No need for name calling. It makes you look dumber than your target.
A reverse merger is the only thing that will add shareholder value. Nothing lese matters and anything in the interim before that is just noise.
I will jump in. I am not surprised to see the bid drop on the first release of news (or sign of life) in a very long time. Many, including me, probably forgot we even owned this POS until the ticker was flagged with news in our quote lists. I looked at the quote for the first time in months today - probably others did too. Some of those will react and sell into the bid, whatever it is, just be get out (and, like you say, capture the tax loss).
If there is any real sizeable demand for NLSC at .10 the bid won't stay there. On the other hand, we could see even lower bids prevailing until year end as MMs harvest the tax selling.
There has never been a deal on that could subsequently be off...
That probably gives a clearer picture of what SHMP common shareholders can receive - looks like about .0116 YOTA shares for every SHMP share, or about 11.6 cents per share IF YOTA holds onto a $10 per share valuation.
If we drop back to about that level between now and deal closure (a real possibility imho as we will likely see tax selling in December)) I will consider getting back in.
The real question then becomes "What is the potential for the new, well-financed "son of SHMP" company going forward?".