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 only see 83075 in volume, although I thought it was 126K...
seems to be bouncing between those #'s...
derrrrrr...
Great insight and depth. Thanks for the highly intelligent and thought-provoking post...
Oilslick,
Thanks for the email. I do think a few more cheapies are coming, although a big move is also coming eventually imo, so I wouldn't want to be caught without shares. Keep a little cash to add if possible in the teens, but hold a solid core position with certs in hand for the main ride imo...
----------------------------------------------------------------
I think your right investorstallone. Just wish I had the powder to scoop up some more to add to my long position.
Although watching our S/P being brought down ever so
s-l-o-w-l-y is not a whole lot of fun it really in a way isn't bothering me. In fact I believe it, in the long run, is really going to help us big time now that we are at this S/P again.
There are probably more than just a few that are more than ready and are drooling all over another opportunity to "steal" more shares anywhere in the teens. And most of them,IMO,are longs. That will mean more of the true float gone for good.
Then we get to watch the noose s-l-o-w-l-y tighten again with every phone call made for more certs. And we all know whose neck is in the noose.
GLTA who are able to take advantage of another golden opportunity to add on and make those shares really count by calling in for certs. Go Team Hemi!
GB,
oilslick
That's an interesting rumor. I figured that they were making good progress now that the weather has improved. I look forward to hearing this in PR form...
Guys, looks like potentially a good quiet time to add imo...I'm looking for a few more in the .17-.19 range, but anything will good in the .20's a few month from now imo...
Any target/resistance in mind for SBEI?...looks like 7 is the next resistance on the chart...
Isn't that an oxymoron???
SBEI...BOOOOOOOM
Agreed...SBEI looking like it's gonna explode soon...
The i-box says O/S 50 mil, float 500K. Are these #'s pre or post split?...thanks
I bet we will chew through some 50's on Monday...next week hopefully will be a nice consolidation and build a base to move up from...congrats on a nice day
Well, we didn't get .50, but it wasn't too shabby! :)
Thanks...and I will call myself as well, just to be responsible...
So, has anyone else called to confirm the 500mil A/S? If not, I will call...just don't want to pester the TA...
Every A/S increase must be released publicly anyway...Sounds like seeds of doubt are being planted...
Nice move so far... .50 eod imo...
Stars are aligning here...nice news...
Okay, I'm gonna go take a nap...If someone with few enough brain cells would hit the bid at .33, I'd be much obliged.
5000 more shares...the way people whack the bid sometimes, you'ld think they hated money...
I just picked up a "Stallone starter"...9000 shares at .35. Anyone else want to sell me some more??? I want about 30000 total. If you want to give me more, you can find me at the bid, ya whackers...
No good deed goes unpunished...
The post WAS relevant if your goal was to make a highly suggestive statement that we are being illegally tipped off by Keith. Since you say that was not your intent though, the more appropriate excerpt should provide a litmus test for illegal communication with investors. According to the laws, information cannot be both “material” AND “non-public” when shared. The following would have been a fairer excerpt imo…
(There is also no mention of violation in regard to email or message boards in the entire document. Each case of violation is open to interpretation.)
“Other suggestions from commenters included providing more interpretive guidance about types of information or events that are more likely to be considered material. While it is not possible to create an exhaustive list, the following items are some types of information or events that should be reviewed carefully to determine whether they are material: (1) earnings information; (2) mergers, acquisitions, tender offers, joint ventures, or changes in assets; (3) new products or discoveries, or developments regarding customers or suppliers (e.g., the acquisition or loss of a contract); (4) changes in control or in management; (5) change in auditors or auditor notification that the issuer may no longer rely on an auditor's audit report; (6) events regarding the issuer's securities -- e.g., defaults on senior securities, calls of securities for redemption, repurchase plans, stock splits or changes in dividends, changes to the rights of security holders, public or private sales of additional securities; and (7) bankruptcies or receiverships.47
By including this list, we do not mean to imply that each of these items is per se material. The information and events on this list still require determinations as to their materiality (although some determinations will be reached more easily than others). For example, some new products or contracts may clearly be material to an issuer; yet that does not mean that all product developments or contracts will be material. This demonstrates, in our view, why no "bright-line" standard or list of items can adequately address the range of situations that may arise. Furthermore, we do not and cannot create an exclusive list of events and information that have a higher probability of being considered material. “
http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm
Sorry, I just figured if an excerpt is cited, it would actually be relevant to the original statement and the context. I'll look at the link...
I know what you saying here about fairness. I just consider it a cryptic use of ambiguity to post something the way you did...
"Detailed clarification" in regard to what? Does anything Keith has emailed previously violate this text? That text only includes "advanced warning of earning results" as an example, (at least in the excerpt), and I never heard Keith talk about specifics of earnings...unless I missed something.
I certainly need to see something more specific and little less ambigious to consider a informative email some type of wrongdoing...
Simply because it's not SOP, or do you believe it's bending the rules?
Shorts are still attacking SBEI...I would be pretty nervous shorting this thing given they way it moves with r/m coming...
wholesale deletion of posts does not impress me one bit. I like to read with the good with the bad, otherwise I feel like a sheep... baaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
Although I am usually reluctant to blame "mm manipulation" for inconvenient selling in pinkieland, it's hard to deny that the pps movement is a bit screwy here and unusual, even for pinks. Sometimes trades appear on HMGP after the bell that are either way above or way below the daily trading range and seem to either screw with the charts or shake people's confidence a bit.
I think it's time we test this theory and find if mm's are short. Let's get those certs boys!
So we closed at .25?
Isn't 3 billion the whole amount for SE Kansas??? I'm pretty sure they only have a slice of the 3 billion barrel pie...
Ouch...You should have signed it Phil McKrackin Whitcomb
Unless one day without warning we see a squeeze that sends us to the dollars...To the mooooooooon lol
On three different occasions I had a bid that didn't show up...and it was a sizable enough bid to merit seeing...
Hey Charlatan, nice to see you here...I've still got some UWRL for the day that it really pops...
Thanks Manti!
Reverse split...yikes...no thank you
BLDH...not very impressive though...
Well, a hammer is bullish on the chart...who knows...doesn't seem like a good "tactic" to me