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.
Rick: I like the logic of that as well.
How is a reverse split to .10 going to make any difference great enough to warrant additional interest in BTCS outside the stock increase?
Charles can't really sell out at .10 and buy back in at .002 a month or two later so who benefits in that?
If there's no substantial change to the company or its revenues, logic says it will sliding right to where it was before.
If there's gonna be a split, it has to connect to some reason, garner some additional attention that will enhance the bottom line of BTCS to some degree.
Question is, how and why would .10/share garner that interest.
TRADEDEEZ: I agree with you.
I read that article and I am familiar to a small degree with most of the major setbacks in 2015 and 2016.
I'm not a crypto-currency fanatic because I see it alarmingly similar to a one world currency issue and closer to Fed control. But I do see it as a very viable alternative currency and it's advancement is imminent to some degree.
Charles has stayed the course and I'm doing so as well.
Investing in this company is a possible waste of a small amount of money but on the flip side, it's got a huge posibile return for that small amount of money.
If I had invested in the days of $90 and was still holding, I'd be buying now with the "hopes" of diluting my current losses through near term gains.
I am however, a speculator and I'm willing to speculate on BTCS reaching $10 this 2017 year.
This next 5 year period will see the greatest, legal transfer of wealth in history and while I may be way in the back, I'm riding that train.
MREGYPT: Oil will eventually peter out either by supply consumption or by requirement because of the disruptive after affects due to mining it. But right now, there's more cost sense in oil than solar.
Solar just isn't going to shine anymore like it did 8 years or so ago. Not much more than a cloudy day anyway.
The technology isn't even practical in the northern parts of the United States because of the solar arc.
You can pitch the "Good Cheer accolades" all you like and some saps will follow and buy in but you're not going to change "products basic demand" figures.
The technology just doesn't sell well and won't ever again until alternative energy sources are ruled out or the technology makes a startling advancement in efficiency or cost.
Ascent, with a really SUPER sales contract to some really unusual client (FED's or NASA) may see $2 but anything else will be short lived and unsustainable.
As soon as nuclear clears the stigma, off line power plants will come on line and new plants will be built creating an inherent demand for uranium. That's the coming event.
A solar collector field will generate enough wattage for a community, A nuclear power plant on the same footprint will generate enough power for a state and the power keeps generating, rain or shine.
ABROIS. I'm not pitching Uranium here.
What I'm posting is a clear explanation as to why Ascent won't ever again see 2008 pricing of $240 or 2010's $80 or 2012's $8
Ascent may see spikes as high as $2 or maybe $4 because until someone builds a reactor small enough to fit in a car, space travel and exploration make solar a natural choice for power generation but the days of mega value are gone for the solar business until some form of major change is affected in either the alternative energy sources or in the technology itself.
With good management and great sales, Ascent may again return to above $1 but there just isn't a demand for a company that produces a product that a very small portion of the population has an interest in purchasing, especially when there is so much competition from other solar companies, harping the same message.
If you bought in above $10, odds and probability demand that you'll never again see your money again. Not in your lifetime anyway.
Your best course would be to sell out (at least partially) and invest in an alternative with better upside potential.
If you're interested in upside potential in the Clean Energy field, uranium is about the only other technology available.
Avesoro, formerly ARSMF, took a slight gain today on 1.9m volume.
Here the price is (0.16/shr) and here the price will basically remain.
Come on folks. REALLY?
Solar came on the market as a "big con" and because it was new, it sold like crushed ice in the desert.
Now it's been around for several years and nothing is new about it anymore.
Everybody knows it's "ho hum".
There's nowhere for the stock price to go unless the materials to transform the sunlight to wattage are SUBSTANTIALLY reduced (that would take a freaking amazing new invention or technology) OR, oil and coal are outlawed and nuclear is still shunned.
Without one or a combination of those, these solar companies are doomed to slide up and down based only on publicity hype.
Who can shout the loudest and the longest.
If I had anything tied up in solar (and I don't thank God), I'd pray for a super salesman BS'g enough of the public to bump the price to a couple bucks and I'd bail out immediately.
Find me a solar company with a 4 sqft solar panel that generates 250 watts and costs less than $50 and I'll invest again.
Till then, I'm investing in uranium as the next cheap and clean energy source.
Bankruptcy is the more likely.
Trouble with solar is cost.
Pay back on expenditure is still like, 10 years.
These companies spend a crap load of money selling you on their newest and greatest gizmos designed to make power from the sun but you still have to pay a boatload of money to someone to get the system.
So long as oil is $50/brl, solar doesn't make sense.
If you want a reliable clean fuel look to uranium mining.
Right now the ONLY problem nuclear power has is bad publicity.
But when the need for clean and cheap power becomes a major concern, nuclear power will rise and so will the $10/shr uranium mining stock prices that are now selling at $1 or less.
Baring in mind that this article is nearly a year old...
Fantastic digging TRADEdeez!
Exclusive: BTCS Eyeing Nasdaq Listing As Part of Financing Push
BTCS (OTCMKTS:BTCS) is aiming to upgrade its public listing to the Nasdaq as part of efforts to secure another critical
Leon Pick | News (CryptoCurrency) | Tuesday, 15/12/2015|13:59 GMT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"BTCS is working through a number of steps to ensure compliance with Nasdaq listing requirements, said Allen. For example, as the Nasdaq requires a minimum share price of $4, BTCS would have to do a reverse split on its shares, currently worth $0.11 apiece. The company would also have to hire an independent board of directors."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
There's your answer in a nutshell.
Assuming Charles is still looking to get on he NASDAQ as stated in the one year old article, he would now need to do an 1800/1 reverse split to achieve the $4/shr margin alone.
Got 1,000,000 shares now?
After the split, you'll have 500
There must be something else going on to bump the share pricing.
http://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/news/btcs-eyeing-nasdaq-listing-as-part-of-financing-push/
Laughing... You're bragging about that?
As Promised, the name change took place today.
Filing does not say anything about listing intentions at least as far as I read.
First off. I don't think anybody actually thinks the company is working on listing with NASDAQ.
I certainly don't.
I, like the others, are just saying this is what it would take to get there.
To jump from a company demanding .002 to a company demanding 4.0 is a huge move and while not out of the question, is none the less, highly improbable.
We do believe however, that coming markets and economies could very likely drive new interest in cryptocurrency and BTCS is in a good position to capitalize on that interest.
I personally, would be happy to see .01 because of the promise it lends to seeing a thrilling, 1.0
You gotta crawl before you can walk and you gotta master the walk before you can run.
BTCS is a strong hold in my opinion.
BUT. That's just my OPINION and I've been wrong before.
Why Circle's Bitcoin 'Pivot' Isn't What it Seems
Noelle Acheson (@NoelleInMadrid) | Published on December 12, 2016 at 13:00 GMT
http://www.coindesk.com/circle-bitcoin-shift-isnt-what-it-seems/
What's going to $2,000?
Bear in mind when you read this article (and this post), that this $2,000 number being used here is in reference to the exchange rate of the actual "Bitcoin" itself and not the stock price in the company.
Currently, bitcoins exchange rate against the dollar, is at $780.
Admittedly, an increase in it's exchange rate would also mean an increase in the stock price but that's due entirely to investor interest and that's tricky.
Also says trading price minimum of $4.00
To get listed via a merger, the trading price of the new company needs to be at least $4.00
Conversely, the merger company needs to be currently trading at a minimum of $4.00
Then there's the question of who's name is retained.
Say for instance
Company "A" trades at .0002
Company "B" trades at $4.00
If they merge, Company "A" gives up its name to Company "B" but the merged shares result at $4.00(+/-)
If 1,250,000 shares is a goal number of shares and Company "A" and "B" both currently have 1.25m they might consider a reverse split to whittle the independant numbers down so that the resulting total after the merge is 1.25m
BUT that's just my opinion and I have been wrong before.
Or are you suggesting...
That the "A & B" merger might fulfill the $45k requirement for the new BTCS Nasdaq listing?
"The reverse split is for a merger with another company".
What are you saying here?
Reduce the number of company "A" stock while simultaneously reducing the number of company "b" stock, then merge "A" and "B"?
How does a reverse split connect to a $45k requirement?
The "REVERSE STOCK SPLIT" mentioned in reference to...
"Within 90 days of Original Issuance Date of this Note, the Company shall use its best efforts to obtain shareholder approval and file a Certificate of Amendment to its Articles of Incorporation to effectuate a reverse stock split or increase its authorized capital in order to permit the exercise and/or conversion of all of the Company’s outstanding securities into shares of Common Stock including securities owed to holders pursuant to anti-dilution protection (the “ Charter Amendment ”) and an additional number of shares as may be determined by the Company."
As far as option #1, the reverse split is concerned, it seems to my feeble mind that if you wanted to issue additional shares to raise money you might conduct a reverse stock split so as to reduce the number of outstanding common shares, thereby increasing their individual value while not affecting the total bottom line, then issue new shares at the new pricing.
As far as the "increase it's authorized capitol" option is concerned, I'm not knowledgeable enough in this terminology to make a guess at the thinking.
Anybody have any opinions on this?
Dynasty Announces Closing of Debt Restructuring
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--
(Marketwired - Sept. 16, 2016) -
Dynasty Metals & Mining Inc. ("Dynasty" or the "Company") (TSX:DMM)(OTCQX:DMMIF) is pleased to announce that it has closed the restructuring agreement in respect of its indebtedness owing to Vertex Managed Value Portfolio and Vertex Enhanced Income Fund (together, "Vertex") in the aggregate principal amount of US$4,000,000, previously announced on September 8, 2016 and September 12, 2016. Receipt of conditional approval from the Toronto Stock Exchange has been obtained, the documents held in escrow have been released and the restructuring has now completed effective September 15, 2016.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=30745984
I'm still holding onto this one.
Aureus Mining shares higher as it completes US$76mln fundraise
10:13 06 Dec 2016
Aureus Mining Inc (LON:AUE, TSE:AUE) shares nudged higher as it issued a corporate update, saying its equity fundraise to bring in around US$76mln, as part of a refinacing, had completed.
In addition, its documents to change the company name to Avesoro Resources Inc have been filed and should take effect on Wednesday (December 7).
The fundraise was made up of a subscription from major shareholder and Turkish conglomerate MNG to the tune of US$60mln. The remainder came from a placing and broker option.
Also today, Aureus said its transition to an owner-operator model, as previously reported, was now complete.
Teething problems and issues with the tailings operation at the group's New Liberty mine in Liberia have meant commercial production was declared much later than anticipated.
Bu the mine is now running well, the firm has said.
Production in September was 6,000 ounces (oz) and the group is now targeting 100,000 oz in 2017 at an all-in-sustaining cost of US$845 per ounce.
http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/170040/aureus-mining-shares-higher-as-it-completes-us76mln-fundraise-170040.html
Aureus Mining changes name to Avesoro Resources
08:05 09 Dec 2016
Earlier this week, Aureus issued a corporate update, saying its equity fundraise, as part of a refinancing, had completed.
Aureus Mining Inc (LON:AUE, TSE:AUE) has become Avesoro Resources Inc and its stock ticker will change to 'ASO' in London and Toronto as of Monday (Dec 12).
The firm also confirmed that the change of its website address to www.avesoro.com will also take effect from Monday.
Earlier this week Aureus issued a corporate update, saying its equity fundraise to bring in around US$76mln, as part of a refinancing, had completed.
The fundraise was made up of a subscription from major shareholder and Turkish conglomerate MNG to the tune of US$60mln. The remainder came from a placing and broker option.
Aureus also said its transition to an owner-operator model at the New Liberty mine in Liberia, as previously reported, was now complete.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TORONTO, Dec. 9, 2016 /CNW/ - Further to the announcement of 6 December, the Company confirms that following its name change to Avesoro Resources Inc., trading in the Company's shares on AIM and TSX under the new TIDM "ASO" will commence with effect from 12 December 2016.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I'm gonna withhold comment till Monday earliest but I'm mildly positive over neutral on this development.
All this is good news for existing stock holders.
We're not dealing only with Rubicon's promise, we're dealing with the informal endorsement of CPPIB and Royal Gold because neither of them would reduce or amend their cash investment in Rubicon for a stake in the company shares if they didn't have faith that there is gold to be mined and that Rubicon can pull it out.
Nor would they reduce or amend their cash investment in Rubicon if they thought the company couldn't make good on its initial promise to them without a little easement.
That Rubicon didn't throw in the towel and reorganize also shows a regard to some degree, for its initial investors.
For what it's worth, I currently have enough faith in the company management and their field ops to deliver on their initial promise of production and baring market interference (gold pricing) I believe firmly that Rubicon will deliver.
I'll hold their stock and possibly even buy more.
BUT... That's my OPINION and I've been wrong before.
Huh? "We are praying for failure".
What did you do? Short the stock?
Why else would you "pray for failure"?
Bad advice Larson.
The stock market, like the casino's is gambling with slightly better odds. There are no guarantees.
If you choose to hold your shares and buy additional, that's fine for you but advising others to hold, much less buy is flat out bad advice.
While not a complete ZERO, this stock is sooooo far away from possible salvation that the better odds are to sell now for what ever you can get.
The company is dead in the water.
They have no assets,
They have no income making business,
They have no facilities to even start a money making effort in,
They haven't made any effort to keep their website up to date much less, their investor information, and most importantly,
They haven't even made any formal statement regarding the chapter 11 summation or for that matter, what their plans are now.
To benefit from any type of Trump affiliated money is wishful thinking at best and they would have to literally start over completely which includes retooling and new machining to make any of that happen.
To do that, they would need to raise new capitol themselves and the most obvious answer to that is to issue new stock and there are only two ways to do that;
1) Issue new, existing shares under the existing ticker thereby diluting the existing values or
2) Dissolve the existing shares and reissue new shares under a new ticker symbol.
Using method #1 to accomplish this makes no business sense under their current conditions. Why make any attempt to preserve the existing shares of a defunct business?
The Trump thing is a waste of time. His politics don't benefit bisness loans, they benefit business tax cuts. If you wanted business loans, you voted for the wrong person.
Assuming that Noranda has any desire to conduct business again, it would be in their best interest to dissolve the company completely and start a new company.
Added to the fact that they are currently camped in a strip mall, which logically would be a good location to wind down the business legal works economically, I'm sorry but there's just no logical argument for anything else to occur.
Best luck though in what ever course you choose.
As always, these are my OPINIONS and I'm not always right.
Unless I misunderstood the legal mumbo-jumbo of the agreement...And that's still a good question.
There is (apparently) gold in the ground thy'er working but it's been too costly for Rubicon to mine on its own. Now that Royal Gold and CPPIB are partners in the company, Rubicon (RBYCF) should be coming out of this with increased value.
The only issue I see now is the current price of gold in relation to its cost to mine and process.
IMO
they're giving us 5%
Where'd you get that from?
The restructuring agreement I read says;
- - - - - - - - -
"Existing Equity:
The pre-Transaction holders of Rubicon Common Shares shall retain 5% of the equity of Rubicon upon implementation of the Plan (subject to dilution resulting from the issuance of any Rubicon Common Shares, options or other rights pursuant to the Management Incentive Plan, as contemplated herein)."
- - - - - - - - -
My interpretation here is merely that after the issuance of the additional shares to CPPIB (29% outstanding equity interest) and Royal Gold (6% OEI), existing share holders will be reduced to 5% OEI ownership in the company.
Rubicon will hold 60% OEI and unsecured creditors will lose some money in exchange for considerations listed in the agreement.
- - - - - - - - -
Issuance of Shares:
The issuance of new shares as set out in this Term Sheet...
The issuance of new shares as set out in this Term Sheet shall be subject to dilution resulting from the issuance of any Rubicon Common Shares...
- - - - - - - - -
I don't see anything in there about losing stock nor do I see anything in there about stock dissolution or a re-naming of the stock.
- - - - - - - - -
Listing and Trading:
Rubicon shall remain a public company following the implementation of the Plan and the Rubicon Common Shares shall be publicly listed for trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) or the TSX Venture Exchange.
- - - - - - - - -
What I'm wondering about now is when the new stock values will kick in.
http://s1.q4cdn.com/385694504/files/docs/Restructuring-Term-Sheet.pdf
"Updated their filings."
http://m2compliance.com/hosting/company/CRCO/filings.html
Still not seeing this.
Don't understand why Carolco is relying on Reelco for income.
Seems to me while lots of people go to the movies, only a handful play computer games and fewer still even know about VR technology much less have the ability to experience it.
Seems to me that a "block buster" movie is the ticket back into the money.
What am I missing here?
Confusion.
I'm still not getting it.
Why is everybody here pumping this stock?
I see all kinds of notices that the stock is up and I'm still down .002 from my buy in.
What's so great about BTCS?
Where is this company actually going?
[LAUGHING]
What company are you looking at?
My ticker shows it's down .0003 and that's below the .0042 that I bought in at.
Where's the beef here?
Does anybody have any idea what the direction is that this company is headed?
That's what I thought as well.
Seems to me if it was relevant, some type of action initiated by the SEC would have occurred.
Chalk it up to additional revenue to SUNE.
Might could be.
Doubt that a film is likely from his garage unless it's shot in Super-8 anyway.
Makes me dubious about my investment too though.
Does anyone have any idea, what they are doing with CRCO?
I looked them up on Facebook and sent a PM to them regarding a book I wrote and this is all I got.
(Me) Would you be interested in looking at a book I wrote for movie.
(Them?) Sure thing.
(Me) I'm assuming I'm reaching Carolco Studios.
Please confirm?
(Them?) Look man, I own the video library, and Carolco pretty much runs out of my parents garage. That said, the name does bring in some nice profit, even to this day
(Me) I saw a write up somewhere that you released I remake all that Jap film Takashi [Audition]?
What are your plans for the company?
Are you interested, tooled or connected to make another picture?
And contact terminated right there.
My sympathy Dude.
I lost less than a hundred. I bought a crap load of stock when they were selling off.
I agree with you though.
Sometimes you bite the bear and sometimes the bear bites you.
The magnitude of the accomplishment is directly proportional to the amount of risk involved in accomplishing it.
I gave up this morning and sold out for what I could get.
No bad feelings.
What disturbed me most was the companies lack of announcement of emergence from chapter 11.
Then they pull their website off the internet (or let it expire, same thing).
Then to top that off, we get a post that the company has moved to a strip mall location. I assume that's just to finish up the pleadings prior to dissolving the business.
I've always known that the stock market was a gamble with better odds than Vegas.
On to other investments.
Ok... So what?
Do you have any thoughts as to how this affects SUNEQ?
"December 2, 2016 (Taiwan time) -- GlobalWafers Co., Ltd. (TPEx: 6488) (“GlobalWafers”) is pleased to announce that the acquisition of SunEdison Semiconductor Limited (“SunEdison Semiconductor”) by GlobalWafers has been successfully completed."
Has anybody visited the so called headquarters in the strip mall?
Has anybodys inquired as to what the plans are for the company and its existing shares?