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.
Then put the info from Finra and the message in the IBOX, please.
This directly helps people understand that daily HRNF short numbers may not really be shorts....but retail sellers ....and it is with info from FINRA itself....and a link to FINRA answer.
Great. Thanks for the info. Seems the failed to not provide that information and ask to see what the ad looked like before it was placed there.
Did the CEO mention how much it might cost HRNF to place such an ad on GNC?
taking away shares and then adding them again.-Isitreal
I tend to agree with you last sentence. When I read the press releases a few times, I see wording just like their last buyback "board-authorized" share restructuring plan before the previous reverse splits.
In their recent release, they indicated shares would be going to management and insiders? Hmmmmm.....and equity financing again? Dilution once again?
Heck, the CEO is owed more than the whole market cap. If he gets shares for his huge loans, deferred salary, bonus plan, etc.....
Wow, that's almost like a reverse split
Chill may not be lifted 'till 2012 or later.
HRNF had the same chill imposed during much of 2010, too. Just ask the CEO. He even PR'd about it.
Selling for how long? Could simply be a small contract for a trial. HRNF may even be paying GNC to try to peddle the gum.
At those high prices - almost $36 for 12 pieces of gum -I sure wouldn't buy it.
HRNF has 15 billion shares authorized.
They obviously need that authorization in case warrant-holders convert to shares of HRNF.
HRNF is known for massive dilution at times they are claiming buyback, etc.
Gum is a terrible way to release the Acai. Doesn't hold much to begin with.
It is not obvious. website shows 12 pieces of gum for almost $36.
At least HRNF now has less incorrect information on their website.
They can also continue diluting, like they are know best for.
360,000 hrnf shares for 1 pack of gum?
$3 per each tiny piece of gum?
doesn't look good
No, but is is online at GNC.
Gonna be pretty difficult to sell any gum at those prices....simply ridiculous.
The daily short interest is meaningless...
Good info to explain problems interpreting Finra's daily short interest for HRNF. That is why I keep an eye on the bi-monthly reports on short interest................
those daily numbers mean almost nothing. Here’s why.
It is theoretically possible to have 100% legitimate retail sells show up as 100% shorts in the daily finra numbers...
Consider someone selling shares through their broker. There are two legs to the transaction, the MM selling the shares into the market and the MM taking ownership of the shares from the seller’s broker. There is also a possible third case in which the MM just buys the shares from the broker to complete the sale and holds them (as MM's can end up with both short or long positions in a stock in an effort to make a market). In this sell case, if the leg of the sell transaction from MM to the market is counted, the sell will (somewhat surprisingly) appear as a short in the numbers if the MM sells the shares to the market first before taking ownership of the shares from the broker (as the MM may sell short to the market first knowing that he’ll immediately get shares to cover from the seller’s broker). If the buy from the broker to MM leg (or the buy to “hold” by the MM) is counted, the sale will not appear as short. Only one leg of the transaction will appear in the daily numbers to not confuse the volume numbers.
Buy transactions are equally confusing as they also have two legs. The leg from the market to MM and the leg from MM to broker. If the leg from market to MM is counted, the buy not will show up as short (as the MM bought shares). If the leg from MM to broker is counted, it will show up as short (as the MM sold shares to the broker). There is also a third case in which the MM sells his own inventory to complete the buy (which will likely not show up as short) and a fourth case in which the MM sells shares it doesn't have (naked shorts) to complete the sale. This naked shorting is legally allowed so that the MM’s can make a market.
In general, the finra numbers are supposed to tally only the "consolidated tape" transactions, that is the transaction legs between the MM and the market (not the legs between MM and brokers--called media transactions). This has the effect of often having a large number of legit sells (possibly even all of them) show up as shorts in the counts. If this was confusing, that’s the point. Exactly what a short in the daily count means depends on a variety of factors including exactly when and in what order a MM completes the two legs of a buy or sell transaction. High short numbers might very well indicate a high number of legitimate retail sales.
May want to tell the CEO that failure to list liabilities like those on financials, when you know you owe them, can be pretty serious.
If HRNF fails to list those liabilities on their already-past-due filings, the SEC may be very interested in hearing about it.
hadesdog - Pagnano claimed Florida judgments were not valid?
He had better consider them valid, since anyone doing business in Florida or having a business license is subject to those valid judgment liens.
There are hundreds of thousands of dollars in judgments that have now been certified as Heathrow Natural being the debtor. Interest is accruing,too.
If HRNF had real assets, the plaintiff could have the sheriff sieze those assets to pay the debt.
NO the PPS is far too high
The massive issuance of convertible and additional classes of shares forced them to raise the share authorization.
The common shares could soon balloon to close to the increased authorized shares.
This potential dilution remained hidden to me, until I looked at the massive share conversion potential of the other classes of shares.
Probably why they increased the share authorization to 15 billion shares.
They need that many (at least) for all the shares they disclosed they plan to issue, IMO.
All it takes is an lawyer's opinion letter and HRNF cooperation to get those restrictions removed so the shares can be dumped into the share pool.
We already know, from the SEC action against Gendarme, that illegal share dumping has been going on for years. What we don't know as the investigation into Gendarme's actions continues, is what role Heathrow had. Heathrow claims they did nothing wrong. I would expect nothing other than that kind of claim to be made by Pags.
Are you sure?
If a company issued shares for "consulting" but knew they would simply cancel all/part of the contract just to cancel the shares to make it look like a buyback, then what?
HRNF lready has proven to me that what they tell investors cannot be relied upon, so I have reason to be suspicious of anythging they say they are doing.
Company has confirmed no buyback - only some cancelled shares.
Cancelled shares could simply be shares issued for services. If HRNF simply decided to take shares for services back, it is not a buyback.
The shares for services scheme has been used before to make it look like they are really buying back shares. Unfortunately, HRNF does not provide information.
Plus, they are almost broke, at last report. No money available for buyback.
They put the big red stop sign and insider trading warning on HRNF in the same manner they do others that can't provide timely material information to the public markets. It is only a warning to investors to be wary with stocks like this. It is not telling them to not buy the stock. That is their own decision.
I think they also add the warnings to shame companies into providing current information. They even now let co's input and certify current info online. It also might cost money to pay for the service. Got to sell the gum somewhere. Are they really selling anywhere?
The Company disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements.
This is the main reason one should avoid having anything to do with HRNF, and it is the last thing HRNF warns investors about, in EVERY press release.
The daily short interest is meaningless...
Ninja7 Member Profile Ninja7 Member Level Share Friday, November 26, 2010 12:46:15 PM
Re: None Post # of 281
KoolAid: Daily FINRA Short Numbers
This is one of my favorites. How many times have you seen someone post the daily finra short numbers and make some claim about how the market makers are holding back a stock because the the short total is so high or some other unfounded claim. Let me state that those numbers mean almost nothing. Here’s why.
It is theoretically possible to have 100% legitimate retail sells show up as 100% shorts in the daily finra numbers...
Consider someone selling shares through their broker. There are two legs to the transaction, the MM selling the shares into the market and the MM taking ownership of the shares from the seller’s broker. There is also a possible third case in which the MM just buys the shares from the broker to complete the sale and holds them (as MM's can end up with both short or long positions in a stock in an effort to make a market). In this sell case, if the leg of the sell transaction from MM to the market is counted, the sell will (somewhat surprisingly) appear as a short in the numbers if the MM sells the shares to the market first before taking ownership of the shares from the broker (as the MM may sell short to the market first knowing that he’ll immediately get shares to cover from the seller’s broker). If the buy from the broker to MM leg (or the buy to “hold” by the MM) is counted, the sale will not appear as short. Only one leg of the transaction will appear in the daily numbers to not confuse the volume numbers.
Buy transactions are equally confusing as they also have two legs. The leg from the market to MM and the leg from MM to broker. If the leg from market to MM is counted, the buy not will show up as short (as the MM bought shares). If the leg from MM to broker is counted, it will show up as short (as the MM sold shares to the broker). There is also a third case in which the MM sells his own inventory to complete the buy (which will likely not show up as short) and a fourth case in which the MM sells shares it doesn't have (naked shorts) to complete the sale. This naked shorting is legally allowed so that the MM’s can make a market.
In general, the finra numbers are supposed to tally only the "consolidated tape" transactions, that is the transaction legs between the MM and the market (not the legs between MM and brokers--called media transactions). This has the effect of often having a large number of legit sells (possibly even all of them) show up as shorts in the counts. If this was confusing, that’s the point. Exactly what a short in the daily count means depends on a variety of factors including exactly when and in what order a MM completes the two legs of a buy or sell transaction. High short numbers might very well indicate a high number of legitimate retail sales.
bonafide market makers naked shorting to make a market is perfectly legal.
Post one link showing that HRNF overseas account holders are shorting HRNF.....not just the unreliable info from finra daily short numbers that mean absolutely nothing.
Can't argue with you there. Shorting would be a good strategy at any price above $0.0001....if it were not for the huge margin requirements.
HRNF seems to be failing on pretty much everything they do, as expected.
Probably already planning the next reverse split.
CEO may be afraid
to file even unaudited financials.
The discovery of public info on more massive liabilities (per Florida sunbiz.org) that they failed to include in previous financials could be the big reason HRNF has once again failed to update pinksheets as promised.
Latest share structure info
HRNF Security Details
Share Structure
Market Value1 $728,976 a/o Mar 10, 2011
Shares Outstanding 7,289,762,180 a/o Jul 06, 2010
Float 4,500,000,000 a/o Jul 06, 2010
Authorized Shares 15,000,000,000 per Delaware (state of incorporation)
Par Value 0.001
Viana - HRNF already admitted it has been improperly issuing unregistered shares in the past. Just read past finacials, where they even warned that regulators could take action against them.
It looks like the DTCC did it in 2010 (long chill imposed)
in 2011, one day after announcing the chill was lifted, the DTCC again took SERIOUS action agaist HRNF.
actually HRNF is diluting, big-time
It is just that all those warrants don't hit the share pool and he can claim to be reducing the shares out.
The real worry is just WHY HRNF now was forced to raise the authorized shares to 15 billion, a 50% increase?
If chill is EVER lifted
HRNF will go right back to no bid, like it was prior to the hype and the so-called buyback and failed pinks update they promised.
Why not bankruptcy?
They no longer have access to public financing, because every last share has been revoked....never to trade again.
I'm guessing some may try to make you think otherwise, but that may be to get some to delay joining any actions against the company for damages.
SEC could be investigating the 1.5 billion shares that HRNF issued in Quarter 2 2010, too. Not sure, but HRNF dumping that many shares for $75,000 cash could raise red flags, IMO.
That's a 50% discount to $0.0001....hmmmm
HRNF was on another DTCC chill (restriction) just prior to Jan 20th (and for 2010, too)
The bid development in the latest action ios that HRNF is involved in a big illegal share selling scheme. Gendarme sold billions of WEHI shares (Now HRNF) and later sold illegally at least a billion HRNF shares. Since then HRNF continued dumping billion more shares for cash.
HRNF in more trouble than I thought?
Since I reported that HRNF failed to include the florida judgment lien liabilities in its last financials, HRNF has fallen very silent.
This is one time I hope regulators follow-up on complaints.
I provided copies of the judgments that HRNF failed to report in doc's that Pagnano signed and certified. Doesn't look good.
steal - no they don't
just pointing out that after all that hype, hop-on showed $0 sales.
I'm not sure e-cig company even had much, and I doubt they even have that many employees.
pva film is already patented by others and has been used for other products/liners to wick moisture away from skin and into absorbant material on the other side of the PVA. No new intellectual property here, and they'd have difficulty dealing with other patent-holders' technology and prior art.
If they keep everything in China and avoid potential infrigment claims by not selling product, they can keep dumping shares, reverse split, and keep dumping more shares.
The "down payment on a machine" is pretty comical. Is Mario helping them again? Just how many shares/warrants have they promised to have somone else make the down payment? Maybe they just gave away even more of the company.
Ridiculous projections by Peter Michaels - ouch. Anyone actually believe him?
Michaels, who says he is launching with the help of angel investors but is also hoping to finance the venture with purchase orders, is unabashedly excited about the prospects.
"We're rolling it out," he says. "In the next 120 days to six months we'll be everywhere - major retailers, grocery stores, big box, wholesalers. Also mom-and-pops, liquor stores and little restaurants. We're already at gas stations and liquor stores."
Citing the scope of the traditional cigarette market- 15 billion cigarettes daily around the world - Michaels reasons that he will be monstrously successful if he can tap a tiny fraction of it.
"If we get a small percentage of that business, even one quarter of one percent, we'll do over 500 million dollars in sales. That's how big the market is - it's huge."
At this early launch stage, he reports the company already has more than 1,000 orders for their initial offering, a disposable electronic cigarette (the reusable kit will be next). With eight employees in their Temecula headquarters, and more than 50 at their distribution centers, all based in the Inland Empire, Michaels says he's confident USAcig will employ more than 100 people within the next year.
gmjones - a reverse split is probably their share reduction plan
Probably 1:300 or 1:500 reverse split
In the past, they have hyped no "current" plan for a reverse split, but then proceeded to dilute, reverse split, and start the massive dilution all over again.
They reverse split in:
2007 (1:100)
2008 (1:200)
2009 (1:300)
Johnny - false info in that release? How can one believe anything HRNF puts out?
.............
said Michael Pagnano, CEO Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc. "All financing going forward, will be based on purchase orders and will have no impact on the share value or require any further dilution.".....
just 5 days later, in another press release, HRNF changed things completely. They starting warnings about more dilution coming!
said Michael Pagnano, CEO Heathrow Natural Food & Beverage, Inc. "As stated last week, all future financing will come via private equity and/or purchase order financing. Any shares issued for such financing.....
Could also be issuing warrants for cash to stay afloat.
Those don't show up in the share pool until converted to shares, but could be the reason they now indicated they raised the share authorization to 15 billion shares, up 50% from previous authorization.
Actually,there was no shorting of HRNF on any of those days.
Just confirmed no shorting of HRNF at all.
HRNF planning a reverse split?... just like they did after a previous statement when they indicated "currently' no plan for a reverse split?
Actually, NITE is not shorting. Not even 1 share. Just confirmed this.