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.
Shorting increased 27% at this price. So there is that. The impossible is done every day.
Kinda of a major contradiction, wouldn't you say? You and Olives state that nobody - and I mean NOBODY can short without paying $2.5/share. There are $7.5 mil shares short. That means someone spent - according to the ihub junior detectives - $18MILLION DOLLARS to short a stock that has a market cap of $11mil. Then you say that it is meaningless.
What is meaningless? Besides your posts... Slay said there NO shorting. I demonstrated that there was. You said that it can't be shorted because it costs $2.50/share to short. Olives said that it is impossible to short without paying the $2.50. You are all wrong. There are groups that short with brokers who will not mark the trade correctly. Who? Jim B. used to do it. His partner too - can't remember his name - I hear he was a male dancer as well. They worked for Franklin Ross - currently out of business for shady business dealings. How do I know? Carla H. went to my law school. She used to short. She would use the above as well as others. They paid her in shares that she was told to dump at a given time. Look into vaper shares - maybe on youtube. There are a few prominent people that discuss how large brokerages would short penny stocks and when things got bad, they created shares by exchanging papers from broker to broker.
Short Selling Data
Short Interest
7,488,532
(27.43%)
01/31/2024
This is just the shorting that remains after 3 days.
And Surf would know for sure. They sit in adjoining cubicles.
True.
Billy Joel was over rated. Ask Christie.
Yea. Oh wait. That was your post.
Wow. Up 12%. What happened?
No. 5 more. And in 2 years.
I had 14mil on the bid and couldn't get one share. Maybe tomorrow. Hopefully people panic and sell some shares.
So much to unpack.
1. Read the Q and the K. You will learn that Foote's salary is $1/year. He cannot... Let me repeat, he cannot take a salary and call it G&A because any compensation is legally required to be reported as... compensation... which is listed as a buck.
2. Surf has stated more than once that Foote is taking things like personal trips on HMBL's dime. He isn't saying that Foote is taking a salary and calling it something else, but in business, you might buy a pool for your back yard and call it a remote therapy room. Those things can sometimes fly under the radar in a private company, but not in a public one - for the most part. A CEO might be able to get away with a few things here and there, but not in the range that Surf suggests. Sarbanes Oxley was passed around 2008 and makes Accounting firms of publicly traded companies verify that stuff like this isn't happening. Since the fines and jail time can happen to accountants now, chances that Foote is doing any of this is very slim.
3. Foote and his family have money. Lots.
4. Foote's vision was Blocks and it's eventual use with web 3, peer to peer and business transactions, and identity. He started this business with Mark Grado and gave Grado a ton of preferred shares as one of the founders. Grado must have had a falling out, because he dumped his shares all the way from $7 to pennies. Might still own some now, but probably not much. Grado's dumping was the initial cause of the major drop in price as he was selling 10's of millions of shares daily. You can compare the S1's (there are 5 of em) and see how much he dumped. The drop in price also screwed with financing of debt. Now the stock was never really worth more than maybe $.75/share since the SEC got involved in trying to regulate the ETX market, but before the dumpings and debt, there was a plan that could have worked.
5. HMBL's product is software. It is not just software, but it is attempting to use technology like Blocks and facial recognition, and data management, and encryption and web 3 to create a whole new platform that we have yet to see. Other companies are attempting to do similar things, but I am told that HMBL is about 3 years ahead of very large companies.
6. HMBL's main revenue was from Tickeri. Before that it was ETX. The SEC just let ETX be a thing again, so expect HMBL to get back into that soon. They already have the platform, but are working on improving the verification. Tickeri was sent packing, but they kept the business model. The removed the ticketing business while updating it (see recent PR). I mentioned a name in a previous email yesterday. Erik Leino. He signed a deal with HMBL under Sumsub. Learn what they do - not a wild goose chase. Then, google Erik Leino and look what he is doing competing against little companies like Fandango and AMC in the ticketing arena. Coincidence? No.
7. How long does it take to change an industry completely? Even web3 with Blocks verification will require a learning curve in industry first, then for the consumers. Compare it to the dot com rise and fall. Compare it to Apple's journey into the phone market. Compare it to Tesla's car. It may be that radical of a change. Three years is nothing. Especially on a shoestring budget.
8. Last one. Foote did what many people do when they find more money in their checking account than they ever dreamed of... buy a hotel room from Hard Rock Hotel, Spend big bucks on your own ticketing company, on a movie trailer company, hire the former head of marketing of the premier baseball trading card company... All because he had a vision of how everything would tie together, but didn't have $3bil in cash to make it all happen. So he got a quick lesson on how not to spend money. He made some very promising moves - likely some were imposed by the gov of California in order to do business with them. The biggest one was to eliminate debt. Cost the shareholders a percentage of their ownership, but made the company substantially stronger.
Tell me you never ran a company before without telling me. G&A include things like insurance, rent, utilities, SEC filings, Accountants, legal work, office supplies, advertisement, web site... and here is the big one... the cost of producing the product... in this case, the tech. HMBL paid both cash and stock for consultants and interdependent contractors and they were not cheap. $8mil is a lot of money for a lemonade stand business, but it is pretty cheap for creating the tech for an etx, web 3 platform, ticketing/event management platform, and digital wallet.
I can understand why you are upset, but it has more to do with your lack of understanding than anything HMBL did. I currently own an $800k a year business and my accountant won't let a lunch slip by without applying the meals rule. A public company under Sarbanes is not going to allow an accountant to sign off on Foote transferring money to himself. Thinking so is... goofy and ignorant (meaning "not knowing" as opposed to being an idiot - giving you the benefit of the doubt).
I don't care if you are even short right now. It is the stock market. Make money any way you can. I believe that the company will start making a profit with the AFL. Doesn't matter if you heard of the AFL or not. Just matters if they are able to turn a profit. I have been in this type of business before. It is all about numbers of people walking through the door.
I rarely get excited. That said, the board of Santa Cruz voted on, and chose HMBL as the exclusive choice for an electronic wallet. You can discount it, but if they don't screw things up, they will make money. Not only in Santa Cruz, but also throughout CA. As bad as the gov is screwing up CA, there is some real money to be made. As for the AFL... means very little. Except HMBL is going to learn how to manage a sports arena while under contract that brings in cash for each and every person that walks into the stadium. There are a few of those similar stadiums around the US and elsewhere.
OK, I will share a secret with you. Don't post this publicly. Erik Leino. Any idea who that is? I mean without googling it. He has a contract with HMBL. Tell me that means nothing.
Thank you for defending me... I guess. And don't invest in this stock if you don't think it will do well. Do I really need to tell you that? I was going to hang out on the VRUS board, but then I realized that was a scam company, so I just stuck around here. Figure it out bud.
He isn't working for free. He is just delaying it. Musk didn't work for free either.
Yes, you are pretty blind. AFL has a contract with HMBL. Did you know that? Income scheduled in April. Santa Cruz has been testing a digital wallet provided by HMBL. In May it will start making money provided there are no problems. In addition to fishing licenses, there is a good chance that we will see the wallet start doing marriage certificates, birth certificates, house titles, auto titles, dog licenses, voting, drivers licenses, alcohol permits... Prolly wont be much money. Until they move to all of California.
I did very well here (and at FORW). If you are still crying about the stock being manipulated up to a buck eighty and then back down, then boo hoo for you. There was a golden opportunity here and many cashed in. Some didn't realize that the underlying company was not producing income yet. Now we are about to make some money, so there is another opportunity. If they do well, it could be bigger than the first time.
Not to nitpick, but it was 1.4 bil and Foote gave up shares to bring it to a billion. Then a couple other times he gave up shares for no compensation as well.
If you read the handful of pr's concerning their efforts to reduce debt through conversion of shares, I think he was pretty clear on his plan. You just didn't understand that there are really only two ways to fund a startup company without cash on hand... debt or equity. The remaining B's are just equity. The ones selling into the market are consultants and contractors getting paid for the work they did on creating the tech. They have their conversions limited to roughly $4k/month. The shares that have been converted were the price of doing business. The conversion of the remaining debt to C's pushes the dilution back 2 years - hopefully to a time after an RS AND after the company has become profitable (profit in April?).
What you don't understand is that when they do a RS, we will have less shares, but the share structure should be between 500-800mil shares. There should be little or no debt. And they should have a decent profit every quarter. So if the stock goes to .20/share and we get a 20 to 1 haircut, our actual value is a penny - up from .001 (rounded so you can get the math). That is a 10 bagger. If the company goes to .60/share because it is making decent money on both the ticketing (including the AFL) and the government wallet, then we are looking at a 30 bagger. What? .20/share? ARE you dreaming? In the OTC, a company with no debt, making a profit and having under a billion shares out is big. I remember a stock with 4 billion shares hitting $1.80 on just a dream of web3 and etx.
I don't ever remember him saying no dilution. It was obvious there would be dilution because it was a startup company with no product when they started. If you are here thinking that the company would have no dilution, then you really need to find a different hobby.
Further, the company made a strategic decision to eliminate debt at the end of last year. To get the right balance between debt and equity financing is very tricky. It is a main topic of conversation in Advanced Finance classes. Even in mergers/acquisitions, there is a debate on the benefits of using cash or stock (or even a combination) to pay shareholders of the acquired firm. Since you probably have not had any finance classes, one of the advantages of using shares to pay debt is that profitability is often easier to achieve (no long term debt to pay down), though the bigger profit is split between more owners (dilution). There are also things like tax implications and cost of capital. When involved in the OTC, equity financing is brutal in the beginning because people such as yourself freak out when the number of shares starts going crazy.
The alternative was $50mil in debt. What's wrong with that kind of debt? When on the OTC, most states have no problem with usury financing - aka death spiral toxic debt(New Jersey is a notable exception when they ruled that toxic financing, if found to be usurious, the contract would be void). HMBL took on some pretty crappy toxic debt with Brighton (was an equity line of credit - meaning that they could take out a loan that was immediately converted to shares) and they had a few other lenders demanding 70% lowest market price from the previous 20 days - allowing the lender to short (and use the certificates as collateral - don't tell me they had to borrow shares at $100k a share crap - they don't). The outrage was intense with Brighton, so the company cancelled that contract before they used it. The other lenders however, took full advantage of shorting the stock in order to get more shares - a regular business practice on the OTC. Once Foote realized that if he couldn't get rid of the debt, he wouldn't be in business, he managed to eliminate the $50mil in debt. Considering they only have made less than 10% of that amount, their only alternative was to convert to equity.
Like it or not Pacific Lion was their only lifeline. If they do what they say they would do, PL will buy up a huge portion of shares sold onto the market. That will keep the price from going to .0001 and causing the OS to reach in excess of 50 billion. It could also provide a huge opportunity once the selling ends. So... who still owns shares that are being sold? Contractors and consultants holding Preferred B's can sell 5mil shares a month. They should run out soon enough. And then there is BRU. What they do, I have no clue. But their minimum price for conversion is .003. If the stock price is .001, they are awarded 3x the number of shares and they were owed a lot. Even though they are working with the company, I believe they are the ones mainly on the ask and selling into the bid because a .0001 drop means a ton more shares.
My guess:
Look for the stock price to stay where it is for a little while until BRU's shares deplete, then expect the price to jump to .003 while they sell the remaining. The stock price will likely fight to go lower than .003 or at best, stay there until the middle of April. Pacific Lion in a conference call 2 months ago, said they expect the price to move to about .003 and hang out there for a couple months. I don't believe that the .003 number was a random guess. I believe they expected they could hold the price at that level while BRU dumped. I believe they lost that fight due to the sheer number of shares they dumped onto the bid, but PL looks like they are still able to keep the price from dropping to .0001. Once BRU (and PL) are done, we will see what the market actually thinks about the real valuation of HMBL. At that point, expect news about AFL and a RS... then after the OTC cries about a RS, the stock price will jump about 30%.
If they get the OS to between 500mil and 800bil with little or no debt, the stock price should react very favorably to any net profit we see (think 2nd Q).
10 to 1 buys today. Oh, yea, Tons of buys one day, tons of sells the next. Tons of buys the next. But you attempt to paint a very slanted picture... as if you somehow profit from fooling people. Hmmm.
This is a classic example of being in a very tight channel. Some call it a pinch. Eventually we should see a very large move up (not sure if it will be temporary or longer term, but a big move up anyway). The manipulator either knows this from his vast experience of trading when the rest of you were in diapers, or he has no clue whatsoever and is just posting what he is paid to post.
Manipulators suggest that market makers are losing millions in order to create a market = even though they copy and paste an explanation that MM's focus on supply and demand to determine PRICE. If they understood what they actually pasted, they would be forced to agree that the stock price should be at .0001 with all the dilution we had IF the market makers were the main buyers at the bid. Instead, someone is buying at the bid and attempting to pay a minimum price while attempting to keep the price from dropping. To me, the obvious conclusion is that Pacific Lion is buying for 2 reasons - 1. They said so, and 2. they have already invested a few $milly into a company that has a market cap of just under $10mil.
Correct... but it would probably move closer to .05 because it still hasn't become profitable, but has great potential to make at least a small profit. Look at FORW at .02ish and has yet to do anything at all.
Not the question. I asked if, instead of 11 billion, we had 500mil, what would the stock be worth. Simple question. Not misinformation. Don't be an ass.
I made $8.6mil. Held onto $500k. Day traded the balance. I understood that the company didn't have a product ready for market and that the price would go back to close to where it started. We were at .0004 when this started. We bottomed out at .0007. Big kids are playing with the price right now, but there is some massive consolidation (buying). Cry when the stock was at $4. Even when the stock was at a buck. Or .30. Or a penny. But at this point, it is buy time.
So the founders kept ownership of the company - over 50%. Good for them. They did the heavy lifting. Grado was the only real bastard. He dumped his shares at the top. Foote was naive in not only paying him so much for his contribution, but also in not realizing that he was going to take profits immediately. Had Grado held, we might be sitting on a $2 stock and much better profit potential. The rest of the founders seem to be holding for the long term. Foote set up a third of his shares for the use of acquisition of companies and to benefit the company. He has retired a ton of his shares with each new acquisition. I personally am not worried about his shares. Same goes for Henshaw.
Your house analogy is crap. Everyone knew that there were no profits and we wouldn't see any for a few years. What kind of houses do you buy???/ Anyone buying now is anticipating profitability in March or April. They plan on holding til at least July. Then, they will likely see returns in the neighborhood of 600%. Oh the misery of holding on for 6 months to need to make 6x your investment.
So why are you here? To cry that you don't understand business nor how stocks work? I feel for ya. Might I suggest you pick a few more stocks and watch them closely, but don't invest? Learn how they work, and then don't jump in unless and until they start showing more than the initial hype and start showing a path to profitability. Then when people try to explain how miserable the company has been, slowly start buying.
If the stock had 500mil shares, how much do you think the stock would be worth? Nothing different at all, just less shares,
Nice copy and paste. Reply back: I'd take that bet.
There is a lot wrong with your 80% theory. Start by looking at Foote's B shares and see how he categorized those. He broke them down into two categories - one was personal, one was for acquisitions. He found out that he couldn't create shares under his name for the purpose of share acquisition, so later, he PR'd that he was taking some of his own shares and "covering the cost." There are a handful of things you will learn from reading the details. His intention was to build a revolutionary product(s) based on blockchain and web3. He is in the process of doing just that.
As for the shares to his family, he was looking for financing to make all this stuff happen. The financing terms were for the most part much better than what he could get off the street. The exception was a $50mil potentially toxic funding from a company that his dad and sister owned a minority stake in. Not a majority. He got a lot of shit for that deal even though it probably would have saved about 4 bil shares from what he ended up using instead. That was Brighton.
Further, Foote's salary is a buck a year. This business may have started out with some really bad business decisions, but it is really hard to make a real argument that Foote scammed the shareholders and pocketed the income. If he - or his family actually sold a small amount shares early on, they would have been able to fund the entire project through profitability.
Read their first quarterly report and you will learn that you are mistaken.
I didn't ask you to share my view. I am not sure why you are reaching out to me. I don't really care how you feel about my investment. I assume you don't have enough money to move the stock up or down, so you are just negative noise. And the stock was never at $8. The stock dropped because this is the OTC and it was manipulated upward to $7 - which was well beyond it's real value. A guy that went by Alex Delarge did a little jail time for manipulating this one. There were many others. Hell, people were laughing at the $2 bil market cap when it rose above $2. Anyone who thought it was undervalued then should not have been invested. Fall from $8? LOL
Foote, didn't benefit his family more than his family floated the company. He is working for pretty much nothing right now as things start to develop. If you have never stuck around long enough with a startup, you have no clue how long it takes for most businesses to get going. I remember trading TSLA while people like you were laughing that Musk was hiding under his desk because things were so bad. I made $40k in one day - the day after I remember someone laughing at their impending doom.
If you are interested - which you obviously are not... this stock will still take a few months, but when they start making a profit (think April or May), the stock will be easy a quarter. Not a ton, but when the stock is sitting at .0009, there is money to be made. And not just a little.
Absolutely right. Don't compare Foote to Bezos. Bezos has done many unethical and even illegal things. I firmly believe that Foote has demonstrated ethical behavior. Though some of his decisions showed a severe lack of experience as a CEO of a publicly traded company.
I once had a teacher that said that if you want to become rich, find a career path that serves more people. Teaching a class of 20 kids will most likely not make you wealthy, but singing na na na na na na, na na na na to 10 mil people might make you obscenely wealthy. When people understand the business model HMBL has, they might start humming a happy tune.
Nice
Are you referring to the poster who just spewed obscenities rapid fire on here and made Huggy sprain his finger? No freedom of speech on Ihub. You are a guest here and must abide by the rules or your speech will be removed.
Tickeri. Bizsecure.
Not one. Correct. At least 2.
You should not trade stocks if you are coming to a conclusion TODAY that you lost money. Give me a break on your outrage. The stock has bottomed out and moved up from the bottom since it fell in 2021.
When I paint a house, I try out a few colors right on the walls. It helps to get a good idea whether I like it or not.
When California decides to go full blown blockchain for documents and even payments, they try a RV permit, maybe a fishing license... things that won't shut down government if something goes wrong. After a trial run, they can decide whether to expand into... well everything. The car and real estate titles will be huge.
I bet you are excited.
Don't pretend to know more than Surf's DD
Why are you sharing this particular bit of info with me? They filed a pre 14C to let shareholders know about this on Dec 6th. Was this news to you yesterday? There are still 11bil outstanding - not 22bil.
Three to one buys so far. Moving up then?
Irrelevant.