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.
Really they should read this:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=137836118
Its says right there, it is a PARODY account, yet more fiction to this scam
Yet means nothing, as it is not fact based. Facts are it is Federal Reserve Board Managed process, no different than banking. You cannot say that the accounting process cannot be relied upon in stocks and yet have full confidence in the banking side. the same exact process is utilized in accounting.
No such thing, its the same accounting system as banking, an electronic settlement system. FTDs are not criminal they occur on both long and short transactions, so there goes that ridiculously wrong statement.
Wrong about what? This stock is not LISTED, prove it
Pretty clear it does have to do with FTDs:
II. “Naked” Short Sales
In a “naked” short sale, the seller does not borrow or arrange to borrow the securities in time to make delivery to the buyer within the standard three-day settlement period.[3] As a result, the seller fails to deliver securities to the buyer when delivery is due (known as a “failure to deliver” or “fail”).
Failures to deliver may result from either a short or a long sale. There may be legitimate reasons for a failure to deliver. For example, human or mechanical errors or processing delays can result from transferring securities in physical certificate rather than book-entry form, thus causing a failure to deliver on a long sale within the normal three-day settlement period. A fail may also result from “naked” short selling. For example, market makers who sell short thinly traded, illiquid stock in response to customer demand may encounter difficulty in obtaining securities when the time for delivery arrives.
“Naked” short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the Commission’s rules. Indeed, in certain circumstances, “naked” short selling contributes to market liquidity. For example, broker-dealers that make a market in a security[4] generally stand ready to buy and sell the security on a regular and continuous basis at a publicly quoted price, even when there are no other buyers or sellers. Thus, market makers must sell a security to a buyer even when there are temporary shortages of that security available in the market. This may occur, for example, if there is a sudden surge in buying interest in that security, or if few investors are selling the security at that time. Because it may take a market maker considerable time to purchase or arrange to borrow the security, a market maker engaged in bona fide market making, particularly in a fast-moving market, may need to sell the security short without having arranged to borrow shares. This is especially true for market makers in thinly traded, illiquid stocks as there may be few shares available to purchase or borrow at a given time.
FALSE,
As per the SEC:
II. “Naked” Short Sales
In a “naked” short sale, the seller does not borrow or arrange to borrow the securities in time to make delivery to the buyer within the standard three-day settlement period.[3] As a result, the seller fails to deliver securities to the buyer when delivery is due (known as a “failure to deliver” or “fail”).
Failures to deliver may result from either a short or a long sale. There may be legitimate reasons for a failure to deliver. For example, human or mechanical errors or processing delays can result from transferring securities in physical certificate rather than book-entry form, thus causing a failure to deliver on a long sale within the normal three-day settlement period. A fail may also result from “naked” short selling. For example, market makers who sell short thinly traded, illiquid stock in response to customer demand may encounter difficulty in obtaining securities when the time for delivery arrives.
“Naked” short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the Commission’s rules. Indeed, in certain circumstances, “naked” short selling contributes to market liquidity. For example, broker-dealers that make a market in a security[4] generally stand ready to buy and sell the security on a regular and continuous basis at a publicly quoted price, even when there are no other buyers or sellers. Thus, market makers must sell a security to a buyer even when there are temporary shortages of that security available in the market. This may occur, for example, if there is a sudden surge in buying interest in that security, or if few investors are selling the security at that time. Because it may take a market maker considerable time to purchase or arrange to borrow the security, a market maker engaged in bona fide market making, particularly in a fast-moving market, may need to sell the security short without having arranged to borrow shares. This is especially true for market makers in thinly traded, illiquid stocks as there may be few shares available to purchase or borrow at a given time.
I never said delisted, because its not "listed" in the first place, only exchange securities are "listed". This pile of shit doesnt qualify for an exchange to be "listed" and is only "Quoted" on the OTC Markets. Get the facts straight.
Yeah actually you can prove with actual documents, its called an FTD report and there are zero FTDs in this pile of shit scam, a FACT that cannot be disputed.
NSS are not illegal, in fact are quite legal, but doesnt matter there arent any here in the first place so not worth discussing.
There isnt one here, not a single share short, quoting short volume is not "shorting" the stock. Nobody cares about temporary riskless principal transactions unless they fail to settle in T +2 days, and even then it doesn't indicate a short position, naked short position or abusive naked short position.
Obviously you have the wrong company, there are zero assets here, no employees, no products, not even a patented piece of land and nothing but convertible debt as disclosed in their disclosures.
Look across the OTC, there are dead stocks running for absolutely no reason. Those with tens of billions of shares are running with zero disclosures or news in over a year. No reason to it all, just irrational exuberance and who knows when it ends.
Yet the data doesn't lie here, No Bid X .0001 is where this sits and it will be there again, a fact it cannot escape.
Thats where this persistently sits, this pump like the others will in fact result in usual No Bid X .0001.
Lol... thats what I thought complete fiction yet again...
Really? What law are you speculating to support such nonsense. First problem, there are no shorts in this ticker.
Well typically they were issued to the dopes that were brought on as pseudo directors, as usual most of them disappear once they figure out that they are being used to promote a penny stock shell and the shares are absolutely worthless as they are not registered and will never see the light of day for free trading. Typically it is some dude that is 80 years old and doesn't have the time on Earth left to wait for something that is never coming.
But hey there is volume here and although nothing like some of these other OTC securities with tens of Billions of shares trading at ridiculous dollar volumes.
FALSE, the share structure was in fact diluted by 4.5 Billion shares into the OS in the last 30 days as reported by the company Transfer Agent.
Like I said, the shorting compounded the price spike:
Henderson theorizes that hedge funds purchases a bundle of shares that would have otherwise been lent out freely to short sellers and bought them back from the short sellers. This created fewer shares for short sellers to borrow in the market and that squeezed the number of possible shares available to be lent out, making it harder for short sellers to bet against the stock. The desperate short sellers needed to find new shares to borrow but supply got constricted.
“All of that price inflation was likely driven by vindictive hedge funds trying to squeeze out a hedge fund that was short GameStop,” said Henderson.
A person cannot short sub penny trash nor would any broker do so for the purpose of shorting. You have failed to distinguish differences in taking a position and liquidity, two entirely different functions. Positions are a rare occurence, .00001% of trade transaction in the OTC are positions taken. While liquidity as we have all seen posted regularly on a daily basis on just about every sub penney stock board, Short Volume can see 100% of volume in a single stock. So what? Its settled in a matter of seconds on a separate leg, we see that on the FTD reports as the result is a nuetral position at the end of the period.
Pull up GME in an FTD report and you will see a continuos aggregate of shares in an unsettled status for days, compare to an OTC stock and you will find there are no comparisons, it is night and day. Most sub penny trash has zero aggregate, and even if there is an aggregate it cannot be distinguished as short as long position trades fail due to imcomplete delivery of either cash or shares in some cases.
Absolutely false, the issue is OTC securities, claims of shorting and naked shorting are in fact baseless 99% of the time. Naked shorting occurs every day on most of the trades on the OTC Markets in a Riskless Principal transaction. MMs do not own inventory in this junk and will not purchase shares from seller first and then sell to a buyer on another leg of transaction, as that becomes ownership of those shares and induces risk. So instead they sell to a buyer first in an open transaction while buying the shares from the seller, avoiding ownership and risk.
Otherwise OTC Markets would have very little liquidity, it would be just internalized order within individual brokerages. The MMs facilitate transaction between brokers on OTC Markets, without them there isnt a true market. Its what is called a 2 tier market, brokers represent the first tier, while the upper tier are the MMs completing transactions between the brokers.
Brokers have naked shorted OTC stock, in fact, often it is during opportunities of pump and dumps where the stock price is high, think in $4 ranges and up, where it is clear there is nothing business wise there, CYNK is a perfect example of insider manipulation that caught one broker in a trap and that guy lost a lot of money and his job in the process, he paid losses from his own personal savings to his brokerage to cover the loss. Despite the fact it was manipulated.
Nothing was added to the AS, that would require a corporate action to be filed with the SOS of Wyoming. The AS is 40 Billion, the OS increased by 4.5 Billion, to 39 Billion +.... enjoy!
Who said it did, the fact remains, this company cannot raise money from the sale of shares as it is not an SEC Registrant.
Yet the OS increased 4.5 Billion it is a FACT that cannot be disputed. The unrestricted shares grew 3.5 Billion a FACT that cannot be disputed all 8n the last 30 days.
Uhhh this is not a registered security, it cannot raise capital with stock.it can only issue stock in consideration of aqcuired debt.
Yet again FALSE!
Evidence is the FACT they issued 4.5 Billion shares, that is EVIDENCE of no restructuring plan.
They aren't restructuring, in the last 30 days they issued 4.5 Billion more shares, so saying restructuring is completely FALSE. No additional shares would be added to OS and nearly maxing out to the AS at this point.
Reminds you of a pennystock on the OTC... bagholders that will likely hold it all they way down to .0001.
Ohh I am positive there were Naked Shorts compounding the problem as well, but in this case Short Interest was already 122% add more fuel to the fire and well Naked Shorting just makes you look at this and go no wonder it got out of hand so easily.
Ehhh, but that is my point, the premise of borrowing something that was already borrowed doesnt equal more shares borrowed. You cant borrow something that has already been borrowed. I was specifically discussing Short Interest and not Naked Shorting, however guaranteed some brokers were Naked Short and had to buy in as well compounding the problem even more.
Yeah but you still have to wonder how this works? How do you get to 122% Short Interest? It is no wonder it exploded so easily, its not really the retail buying, it just starts it, but when there are over 62M shares short and the Float is only 51M... well it doesnt take too much thought to figure out the reason for such ridiculous stock prices. You know the shorts were entering at new levels thinking it would drop in any minute just to be forced to buy-in again and repeat the process.
Not really worth the read, has nothing to do with this stock, not a single FTD. Look at the stocks run to date, all had FTDs in large quantities, short interest and other documented factors. This has ZERO, a FACT that cannot be argued.
Not without doubling the AS to 80 Billion.
First there are no shorts as supported by multiple regulatory documents. Second they issued 4.5 billion more shares and they also authorized 3.5 Billion as free trading just last month, its problematic for long holders.
Uhhh this is not a registered security, it cannot raise capital with stock.it can only issue stock in consideration of aqcuired debt.
Yet again FALSE!
That is false, no such thing.
You do have to wonder why this did not get a scratch of volume like the rest of the overbloated tens of billion shares OTC stock.
Well what does anyone really expect, this shell was improperly brought to OTCQX, the drug trafficking lawyer and the SEC suspended auditing firm produced documents that cannot be relied upon. To add insult to injury he financed this shell through one of the worst toxic financiers out there, Magna. The whole thing was bad from the get go and not one single business opportunity has resulted in any shareholder value. Just a bunch of empty promises.
The only thing it had for itself was that epic pump and dump Rich sponsored to get Magna off his books in 2012. Didn't last long and he attempted another with some low ball promoter in 2014 that only netted a portion of the dollar volume. We have all known this has been nothing more than a front, but Rich cannot have a federal incident if he wants to continue to be a government contractor.
He cannot afford to properly clean up the shell and install a legitmate business into it.