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 know what it is. I want to find out what J_king thinks it is. lol!
I'm afraid I'm a little ignorant. What exactly is a "dead cat bounce?" I thought it was something different than what we're seeing here. Would you explain your understanding of it to me?
Sorry, my mistake. My lowest was .00109.
I am. Though I've been averaging up big time!
When this merger closes, the value of these shares will be 50X what it is now ... at least! How sure am I it's going to close? When they announced the LOI, they said the planned closing was about 2 weeks. This is not a normal LOI, where there's a lot of wishing and hoping and dreaming. This LOI was the result of planning and negotiating ... more of a formality it seemed. No increase in A/S count, no R/S. This is a huge opportunity to be in on the ground floor of what will be one of the (if not THE) largest grow operation in the whole United States!
Reverse Merger
I'm holding WDB* and this - only, and I actually think DKSC has more potential!
WILL explode, as if shot out of a gun, after that .0041 is taken out. IMO
So anyone calling .015 didn't fill, because only a small trade at .0155.
I think THAT is when we'll see the biggest SP increase, when that's announced.
Go to the top and click on the "Hot" link, then go down and click on either "Most Read" or "Most Posted." "Both will show neither NHPI or WDBG on the right, but will show "Woodbrook Group Holdings, Inc." on the left. Click on that and it will bring you to the right page.
"Major dumping" ROTFLMFAO!
Different ways around this: R/S, increase A/S, Share buyback (good chance he did this) to name a few. If he did an IPO, he'd be giving about 10% away in order to raise the funds, and it would take a lot longer, and no guarantee he'd get the price he wanted, or sell all the shares he wanted.
I stand corrected.
Thanks stervc for going into detail. You make good points. I always thought DKSC is important (that's why I own shares); I was simply pointing out that though Hop2it owns a lot of Whitechapel (and thus, soon, DKSC), that in no way means that Whitechapel (soon to be DKSC) owns any of Hop2it. Why I did this was because some poster had intimated that because Hop2it owns marijuana acreage, DKSC would soon own it too - not true. That being said, Hop2it's ownership in Whitechapel IS a good thing, as you point out, helping to maximize its profitability.
Don't have it in front of me right now. Hop2it got bought by company in Hong Kong (which is now where Hop2it is HQ'd), the combined entity which then bought majority interest (or at least a large interest) in Whitechapel. According to links posted on this board.
Is there a connection between Hop2it and Whitechapel (and thus DKSC)? Yes, but the connection is a one way connection, just as there is a connection between you and I and Whitechapel.
Yes, if Hop2it owns a majority of Whitechapel, another way of saying that is that Whitechapel is mainly owned by Hop2it. Okay, we're in agreement on that. And since Hop2it is a major shareholder of Whitechapel, that makes sense they'd want at least one person from Hop2it on the board of Whitechapel. But all of this does NOT mean that Whitechapel owns ANY of Hop2it. Again, I own several million shares of Whitechapel, which in NO WAY means that Whitechapel owns anything of mine! Look at it this way. Hop2it has its own holdings, physical assets and business. They also own a portion of Whitechapel. They invested in Whitechapel. Whitechapel did not invest in Hop2it, and thus Whitechapel owns nothing of Hop2it's.
I could be thick as a brick here, but the Hong Kong/Australia firm buying into Whitechapel wouldn't mean Whitechapel (soon to be DKSC) has any ownership in the Hong Kong/Australia firm. Any more than me buying into DKSC means DKSC owns anything of mine! BTW I own a bit of DKSC.
https://www.nvsos.gov/sosentitysearch/FeeDetails.aspx?ctok=pwD1QppGfPf2ix9K3pgUaA%253d%253d
Reinstatement is obviously part of the plan!
$12,000+ ask slap!
I believe the LOI was a simple formality to something that's been negotiated and planned for a while. This thing is destined to happen! IMO!
I don't usually like the phrase "no brainer," but this one is a no brainer!
No Dilution! No increase in shares! No reverse split! And the deal is intended to complete in two weeks! That didn't sound like an ordinary LOI, more like one given after many hours of negotiation and planning!
For some reason, over the last few days, some OTCX prices have been glitching, and some bids showing above the ask and vice versa.
I'm going to get my company on to the NASDAQ, because, you know, it's a great honor to get on the NASDAQ.
You didn't understand what I wrote. Woodbrook is a financial/investment advisory firm. They invest other people's money for them (among other things). I'm not talking about their own public stock!
Anyone talking about Woodbrook being a "boiler room" operation doesn't understand the nature of financial services. Everyone ... EVERYONE ... everyone who is hired is expected to make tons of cold calls to bring in new clients, including cannibalizing all friends, family and acquaintances. It's a cutthroat business to find, entice and "capture" any and all $$$ from clients. That's the nature of the business, from Morgan Stanley to Woodbrook.
I'd be interested to see the proof that the article in the Irish Times re: Woodbrook is a paid editorial or promotion (like does it say "paid editorial" or something like that - it would if it were paid for by someone).
So is "I don't believe you" considered good DD?
If he does an IPO he gives away part of his company for the investment capital the IPO supplies. In this R/M, in order to do an APO he needs a large number of existing shareholders (hey, that's us!). Okay, they (may) make money. He'll likely increase the A/S count to (say) 3B. So that would mean he'll be able to sell off 1.8B shares (3B - 1.2B O/S) (assuming he hasn't repurchased a goodly portion of the O/S). Let's say the market ends up capitalizing his company at 360M (2 X likely revenue with 9B AUM). This works out to .12/share X 3B. How did he get to 9B AUM from 2B AUM? By buying wealth management companies with the 1.8B X .12/share = 216M he raised from going public. By the way, at that point, his 24M shares are now worth 24M X .12 = 2.88M + a much larger salary than he makes now, with the promise of a growing share price. I think that in financial services there's an economy of scale (like in most businesses), where as the $$$ increases, the % of profit $$$ does too. That's what he's after. To become a real player!
That .0032 was a glitch ... sat there for at least the last hour, while the actual highest bid (next price down), was the one actually acted upon.
Woodbrook does NOT have 2B in assets. They have 2B in assets-under-management (AUM), which means they're taking care of 2B worth of OPM (other people's money). For this they receive a fee, total should be between $30M - $40M annual.
From the first place I went to on-line, upon searching "what are the fees for financial services."
While the standard rule-of-thumb is that financial advisors charge 1% AUM fees, the reality is that as with most of the investment management industry, financial advisor fee schedules have graduated rates and breakpoints that reduce AUM fees for larger account sizes, such that the median advisory fee for high-net-worth clients is actually closer to 0.50% than 1%.
Yet at the same time, the total all-in cost to manage a portfolio is typically more than “just” the advisor’s AUM fee, given the underlying product costs of ETFs and mutual funds that most financial advisors still use, not to mention transaction costs, and various platform fees. Accordingly, a recent financial advisor fee study from Bob Veres’ Inside Information reveals that the true all-in cost for financial advisors averages about 1.65%, not “just” 1%!
Notice the last line. "all-in cost for financial advisors averages about 1.65%, not "just" 1% !!!!!
Your mistake is that you took 1% of 7% of 22B. The company's fee is based on total AUM (assets under management), not on profit. Thus, 1% of 22B would be $220M/year, and the total is probably closer to twice that, meaning by the time they have $22B AUM, they'll have revenue in the neighborhood of $440M/year.
"Random sh*t?" Insurance, investments, tax planning. Do you have any experience in the financial field? These are all related fields which Woodbrook is involved with, all in the financial field, and very lucrative if done properly. Once you get a client willing to allow you to handle their $$$, it makes so much sense to rep other areas of finance, because for sure that client will entrust you in those areas too!
Yes, GIFA has assets. GIFX? (the publicly traded company) ... not so much!
Yes, FRFS changed its name to GIFX, but there was never a reverse merger. In fact, in a filing, GIFX noted that it was not a given that a reverse merger would ever take place. That's when I headed for the exits.
Woodbrook won't have 23B in assets - they'll have 23B in assets UNDER MANAGEMENT. That's quite different than owning 23B worth of assets. Still a glorious figure!
7% is a likely % commission to raise $$$ for an IPO, plus certain fixed costs, those being in the neighborhood of $2-$3M. So in a scenario where $100M is raised, a cost of $10M is very likely.