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 have been with this outfit before the reverse split and the crash. I was in communication with Booth a few times and the picture was always rosy. I get it that the Avande merger is a sign of hope, but so what...
I mean if you are all playing in sub penny land, this news is great, but if not I don't see a real strong upside. Its all speculation. There is a long way to go yet to get to just .01.
you might say, I am tired of everybody shooting from the hip here. This moved a lousy .002 at best. When you are holding a bag like mine, its hard to get excited.
Everybody is so excited, but since this stock was once in the double digit pennies and many of us holding that bag, what are people expecting?
This is a tiny software enterprise solutions company that went through several transformations, several leadership changes and a reverse stock split. In fact, what besides the merger has ever come to light about this company since Booth went incognito on us shareholders?
Are you all just sub penny hunters or do you really expect a share price rise into the pennies and beyond.
New here, can anyone give me an informed opinion of whether this thing still has legs or with the amount of volume with a relatively paltry rise in share price this thing is dying out?
Thanks Hip
New here. I have seen this kind of reverse merger/shell company purchase before. What I don't understand is if this company is already trading under NMKT, exactly what does trading under a new symbol matter other than the need for a legal requirement? What does the shell company really do for NMKT? Was there a market barrier that the shell will help overcome?
If they needed to do this, how is everybody so sure they were on the up and up? Lastly, how much value did NMKT give away to the shareholders of the shell company?
I respectfully request serious replies only.
Ok, now that makes sense.
Yes I know that, but it still uses RFID chips. They can be put into anything. I guess, I need to call the company that makes the Hubodometer.
Not sure what you mean. Explain.
I'm not sure about that as I know the company well and its all RFID technology they are using. The name DataTrac is trademarked and there can only be one trademark for a name. Can you give me a better reason for why you don't think this is the same outfit?
Any thoughts on where this will go. Anyone have the OS, debt, red flags on this? New to the board. I am aware of the DataTrac TM from another company using their product. I'm pretty sure it's the same. Looking for confirmation.
www.zonarsystems.com
Look under products for their hubodometer made by data trac.
Ahhhh... the pumpers!
I wouldn't argue with that.
Morning everyone,
I have been posting this weekend as I have had to stick around the house and with really nothing much to do I felt that if I have the time why not challenge these knuckleheads. Afterall, in a larger sense this a battle of words and ideas.
As the questions to Buck, Watch and Phil get boiled down to their essence, namely what are they doing here, there responses become more and more evasive to the question. In fact, some have become downright juvenile and mean spirited, especially Watch, and that is important to see as it shows the true nature of their being.
I say if you got the time keep up the pressure. Make em do the right thing; make em take responsibility for their words and if they don't then I think we have got our answer as to who they are and what their purpose on this board is.
Watch - still won't answer the question, will ya? You are one class act.
What do I have to prove? I made my decision about buying this stock several months ago so all I do now is look for reasons to continue to hold or sell. If "The dog" and Phil have something so relevant to say that it might induce me to sell, I want to hear it. But when you guys get crazy, sarcastic and can't answer questions by other posters when they question your analysis, its really hard for me to believe that you guys are relevant. I'll state it again, you guys have brought the burden of proof upon your selves by making serious accusations about the future of this company. I'll ask it again, if this company is going into the shitter, why waste your time here? Call the SEC, make as big a stink as you do here.
To Watch and Phil - Look, I am asking a very simple question. Let me try again to put it another way. You might have something relevant to say, but I can't believe you until you both prove your credibility. We investors here put our money where our mouth is based on feeling confident about the investment; its a personal decision. I really don't care if you think it was stupid or not. That's my business and as such its also my business to determine the exact nature of your posts. You could both solve the mystery and save everybody some time by coming clean and telling us why you are so interested in trying to prove to all of us investors why we are wrong. Again, I go back to the central point of my doubt, which is if you have no vested interest in NWAU, what do you care what I do with my money. C'mon! Its up to the both of you to take your argument to the Nth degree if you are really sincere. You know it kinda makes wonder how far you would go to argue a point if it were a life and death matter. The final piece of your argument should be to disclose your interest in this company. That's all I need and then I'll shut up. But instead we get more words that answer nothing.
I'll say it again. You didn't answer the question. What's the harm? You can only come back with a sarcastic, homophobic remark? I am sincere. I really believe you owe us more than you put forth. In essence, I am giving you more credit than you deserve. Its not a hard question. What is your purpose here. You keep telling us we are going to get screwed, but you are not sincere enough to go the extra mile and prove your credibility. The SEC files say what they say, which doesn't really prove your case one way or the other. Do we need more of an explanation, you bet. But it is you that seems to know what the SEC filings and all the other PR's really mean, yet you leave us with the most important question of all, the one that would validate all your claims. Who are you and why are you really here? Even if you are being altruistic, why not explain your reasons for that. No, you gotta comeback with some gay thing. Wow, that's real intelligent. A real brainiac. Just telling us why can put this whole thing to rest and you might actually win the argument.
I'll keep asking the same question. At this point I don't expect you to give me a truthful answer, but perhaps by stating the obvious question from time to time, others who don't have time to go back through the posts will realize that you have been questioned on your sincerity and credibility.
As for me, I am an investor holding as long as I think its prudent to do so. Real simple. I don't have an agenda other than to look out for my investment so that I can make money.
Watch - Lots of words and you are getting closer, but I just find it hard to believe you would spend your valuable time wasting it here. If your aim is to convince us all that NWAU is a scam, well, you are only one step away from doing so. You need to come clean and tell us if you have a vested interest in the company, not just a quizical one. You haven't done that, in fact you dance around it. If you are saying you are here to just observe and comment and help us out, I'm not buying it.
Of course, you'll probably respond by saying you don't have to buy it, you'll see for yourself soon enough. And therein lies the problem. If you are here to just inform us of agreat wrong that is about to occur, you must recognize the responsibility you have to us. If its not clear, then let me spell it out. You owe as transparency, you us fair disclosure! You can't just make comments, even if you think they are facts, and expect people to believe your point of view in this forum. My god man, we are on a BB. All we have is each other and so the burden of proof falls on you.
This company has done everything it said it would do up to and including the merger. Now, I have to admit, the merger smells funky to me, but given the fact that I have been following it as long as you and you claim to have all this valuable insider and experienced information, well then it behooves you not only to give us the information, but validate with fact(you have claimed to have done so) and then give us some fair disclosure. Its not enough to say, believe me now or pay later. Why haven't you made call to the SEC if you so concerned? What a bunch of bull!@#$.
Watch _ I am real curious. You seem to know alot, you profess it as well, but with all the hours in the day, I don't understand why you are here if you have no vested interest in the company.
You write in a sincere manner, but it doesn't tell the whole truth. If you are so sincere about informing the board about the impending doom of NWAU shareholders, what is your motivation?
We are in the business of making money and I don't see that altruism has ever been a motivating factor in that endeavour. If you could just simply answer the question as to why you are here, maybe we just might take your posts seriously. I mean you can acknowledge that there are two points of view on this board, right? If so, and you want to win your argument, tell me and the board what your motivation is for being here. That to me would be the final piece to your argument. Please!
All right, I'm done. I already lied about saying goodbye. Take care everyone. I'm sure we will get to the bottom of this sooner or later.
Exactly!
You are a beautiful person Watch. Hey, its a lgit question. The date on your info goes back to 2001 and 2003 respectively. How is that information relevant to today?
You don't need to respond, I can already guess. Goodbye!
I am about to, but this one grabbed my attention as it cleary was a mistatement of the facts.
Watch - I appreciate your contribution here, but I have been reading your posts since you showed up and I have to say I am suspicious of your intentions. You seem to sound informed, but then when you mix facts with conjecture I have to really question what you are doing.
You know I really don't know what you are doing here anyway. I don't recall, but I haven't read every post of yours, that you have an investor interest in this company. So why would you be here? I mean who spends all day posting on a board like you do and doesn't have a vested interest in the company?
Are you really here to help the masses?
You are guessing. I see. Its always a wonderful thing when someone pronounces to have the facts, but sneaks in their own ideas so as to make it sound like everything they have said is factual. Again the question stands, but I will rephrase it: Why do you think with such certainty that Mr. Kerr is the majority owner at 98%? It clearly does not say this in the filing.
I would like to know who the 1.5 M belongs to, but your answer is invalid.
Watch - I just went through the filing. Where did you see the outlining of the investors (298). How do you know that Mr. Kerr will receive 98% of the 1.5M? I see Shaffer and Kerr getting 50,00 and Original Regulation D investors getting the 1.5 M. Is there a document that you have seen that you could share with us that shows who the original regulation D investors are. Or did I miss something in this filing?
If I have 30,000 shares now at $2.00 = 60,000
After the split I have 10,000 shares at $6.00 = 60,000
No big deal, right?
Now consider this:
After the split the share price drops to a buck = $10,000
Before the split the share price drops to a buck = $30,000
Now you will say that is funny math, but what I have found is that actual value is more or less a perceived value, sometimes created through fairly recognized practices and sometimes created by pure hype. The problem with a RS split is the risk you take as a shareholder determining the true value of the company, especially this one. Keep in mind, as new share holders buy NWAU after the split, there sense of value is not the same as yours. You are still thinking about the pre split price (original cost basis). and they are not. As the shares flip, pre split share prices are relugated to the dustbin of NWAU share price history.
If you don't take into account the pyschological behavior of the market, you may get seriously screwed.
Remember that pyscho bitch from hell you once dated. NWAU is starting to act like one.
Of course, if the fundamentals are sound and you are long on this company, you have got nothing to worry about.
I've been in since .32 and have watched this company for some time now, read all your posts too. So the question I have is about the RS.
I just went through this with GTE (formally GTEL). They did a 15 for 1 reverse split and this put them on the AMEX. The concern there was and rightly so, that even though share holder value was increased, there was no garauntee that the share price would hold up to the pre split price. In fact, it didn't.
Now what I don't here anybody talking about here is just that same subject. If I read the PR correctly, and that seems rather difficult to do by many accounts here, a reverse split of 3 for 1 reduces your shares by 2/3, but your share price effectively remains the same, just multiplied by 3, right? Well, unless there is an extremely positive perception by the market that this RS will add shareholder value, then there is just as good a chance that your new shares will also go down in value.
This plan ultimately leaves you with less shares subject to market forces. Is this plausible board posters?
A R/S Exprience with TIWI
I was into TIWI many moons ago when a R/S was announced. What to do? A telecommunications run out of Canada with business in Eastern Europe. Hmmm,,,so I sold not having lived through this experience before. I should not have. Not just because the stock went up and has stayed up, but because I didn't really do my DD when I bought the stock in the first place and therefore had no business selling it on emotion.
Follow me here? In other words, reverse splits can be good and they can be bad. So ask yourself, what is this company trying to accomplish? Have they made us all feel relatively comfortable over the the last few years with their many decisions and performance. The answer is yes, for me. Now ask your self if this R/S is good for this company? Don't ask yourself what is going to happen in the coming weeks with the stock. For me the answer is this is good. And I say that even though I'm still taking a deep breath. Perhaps it's the excitment.
NPR Story
Don't know if this has been posted.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4598169
Since airships seem to be all the rage these days, you all might want to check this out.
http://www.aerocat.us/pages/1/index.htm
Well, it seems likely we will here more as the last sentence of the pr states that "Today, we break out into personalized meetings with attendees from the first day, which will conclude the Summit."
Looking forward to what will be said from those meetings.
Yeah, I screwed up one word. Meant to say to Neguy don't be the shade in our sunshine.
Newguy, its not that we don't want you to enjoy your moment in the sun, its that we don't we to be the shade in ours. Got it?
Well, I have heard it before and its worth mentioning again. The strat is icing on the cake. The fundamentals of the company without the strat are sound and I don't doubt that in time the sp will be very rewarding to longs. This will go down again, I'm sure. My point was simply that in this game there are always lessons to take away and today is no exception.
Not me. Bought long before Stratellite was in the picture. True believer, strong long!
I think the rise in share price proves that there were a lot of people watching and waiting to pull the trigger and pull the trigger they did! This is a great learning lesson; store it in your memory banks.
Sirwolf, see the previous post titled Danielle
That's interesting. It was my understanding that the only reason a trade may have registered after the market closed is becasue the trade actually took place before closing but registered after due time constraints. How can someone actively trade before or after on the OTC BB? Any ideas?