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.
A couple things comfort me about that massive sell:
1) we're still at a 3:2 buy:sell ratio after a 40million share sell! All trades since have been at the ask.
2) We still have 7 MMs sitting on the bid at .0006. A very strong support.
As much as I loved our 40:1 buy/sell before, that sell wasn't all that bad at all. I think we'll continue moving up without a hitch.
Of course I could be wrong, but I'm certainly not selling out yet.
Love the way the trades screen looks today:
Buy Vol: 57.9mil, Sell Vol: 2.3mil, ?Vol: 2mil
25 shares bought for each share sold. A beautiful turn-around from the last couple days!
I mean the volume's down a bit, but at least it shows that the sell-off is behind us.
Agreed. The RSI is definitely one of my favorite parts; look at the RSI(14), ready to break the 50 like for the first time in over a year. Everything about this chart screams "ready to breakout"
I personally love this chart.
On 60-min:
~RSI(14) at 64.5, climbing nicely, hopefully towards a break of 70.
~ RSI(5) and (2) at 73.6 and 83.4 respectively, both recently broke into 'buy' indications and both climbing
~ StochRSI(14) at 0.878, recently having broken the 0.8 'be in here' filter
~CCI looks ready to pop
~Simple moving averages crossing up beautifully (10 crossing 200, 20 crossed 100 a couple hours back, 50 swinging up nicely)
~ Exponential moving averages doing just as well (10 crossed 100 last hour yesterday, 20 crossed 100 an hour ago, and 50 looks like it might cross within a few hours; 200 is still out of sight at 0.00236 due to the huge drop-offs in the past few months)
~MACD climbing, slightly diverging, but nothing significant yet on this front. Short term still above long, though.
~TRIX converging again
~Very slight dip in accumulation/distribution line
Basically the RSI looks great. Everything else was shaken a bit by the massive sell volume a couple hours back, but still holding pretty nicely and could revert back easily.
The daily chart also looks great.
Unprecedented buy volume, this past week.
RSI(14) coming closer to an upward break of 50 for the first time in over a year. In fact all RSI indicators are looking good.
TRIX looks great, and we're in the midst of a massive spike in accum/dist.
Of course the MAs aren't nearly as close to crossing on the daily, but a 10 vs 20 cross looks like it could come very soon.
I count 5 as well. If you check L2 you'll see HDSN, CSTI, NITE, VERT, and LAFC all sitting on the ask at .0001 that we have to pass through before we get a bid.
http://election.townhall.com/election-2010/state/CA/
Currently sitting at
NO: 51%
YES: 49%
It could definitely go either way from there.
Every time I type or read the ticker symbol, GRNH, my mind pronounces it "Grinch". This could very well fit, because it looks like GRNH is about to steal Christmas from December and bring it to November.
The next few days will be amazing! Hope you're all about ready to climb!
It seems like a lot of the people who think it will pass are already in and the people who expected a huge price drop (due to people flooding out before the votes, if they didn't want their profits to depend on it/weren't willing to risk it) tried to get out early. Kind of the same way everybody tries to take off a day before a long-weekend starts and ends to avoid traffic, but they all end up caught in the traffic anyways. (i.e. everybody thought they were smarter than the next guy, thinking they got in/got out before the rush, maybe)
The volume today is, surprisingly, much lower than any day last week and the week before. It would be expected to be up, either up on buys in anticipation of a passing vote, or up on sells expecting a failing vote.
That said, I still think people will be trying to get in/out before the vote and there's still a good chance of volume picking up later today and more so tomorrow. There's definitely a lot of potential volume that could come over the next day, before the vote.
Along with the previously mentioned "pot plays" it's probably worth checking out SFIO. They aren't totally (or even mostly) pot based, but they have a large JV going with CBIS. They basically have patents and technology on entirely vapor-free e-cigs, and are trying to get FDA approval on special versions to be used on marijuana. Regardless of how the vote turns out these would be used medicinally with CBIS. They also already have several products on the market and financials due in a few weeks.
My favorites are PCIO and SFIO (SFIO for reasons previously mentioned). I think PCIO could have some extra pressure in it's pop due to the CEO (who's had plenty of publicity and interviews, which I expect would continue) and simply due to the the name (Marijuana, Inc.? Perfect! What company do you think new investors trying to get in on the way up, after a passing vote, will see first?)
EDIT: Sorry, I was a little off. Last Wednesday had, likely, less volume; other than that today could very well be lowest volume in two weeks for PCIO. The point is that all the pot plays experienced massive volume over the past couple weeks, much higher than they've seen today.
I'd definitely argue that these are still cheap ones, at least w/r/t the direction it's heading over the next few weeks.
That's actually most of what I was trying to say.
Wifi devices are usable anywhere by definition; it's the service that needs to be there and thought about. As I said: setting up the infrastructure is the most costly part, which means eliminating it would remove most costs.
And as far as the webpages go, that's a big part of why there's more to it than just turning on a wireless router (which anyone can do), which was my biggest argument towards why companies like ICOA are still necessary.
You'll notice that when I said they could expand their network to act like Sprint's, that I also stated " I doubt they will be in that market too soon, it would certainly take time even if they do/did have plans for it" meaning I doubt it will happen, and don't even totally believe they have plans on it. Now it's confirmed: there's not enough money in that to counter-act the high costs (which I expected, it was the reason I wrote what I just quoted).
It sounds like they're moving in the right direction. In computers it's much better to sell software than sell systems. It's also much better to maintain systems than to sell them outright. This is similar to why people can make tons of money by learning ancient programming languages: it's usually either too costly, or too risky to replace architecture that's already in place. I think ICOA's taking a great step by focusing those as their revenue streams.
This is a combined response to your message as well as Mango's:
Yes, there are things that I neglected to mention. My response had becoming lengthy as-was. But there are also things that both of you aren't considering in your writing.
Yes, you have internet everywhere from Sprint: but you also have to pay monthly for that. Most people who don't live alone (i.e. spouse, friends, family, some once-strangers with whom you share an apartment, etc.) and in these cases it's more than likely that it's convenient to have home internet split between the parties (to power each parties separate devices (be they PCs, laptops, phones, gaming systems, and so on)).
So for most people it makes more sense to pay for a household, even in apartments, rather than per-person. In these cases getting a data plan for phone or laptop, to use everywhere.
Paying for another service to have internet everywhere is another bill to pay. As Mango mentioned, most stores (& etc.) are moving towards a system where it's free for the end users. Most people don't want to pay more, they don't want another bill. They're mostly happy using internet at home and at all their hangouts (if they're the type to sit in Starbucks on their computer, or similar locations).
As far as I can tell you're talking about the Sprint 4G system. Their "4G" system runs over WiMAX, an improvement on previous wifi systems with a much larger ranger (so fewer towers/antennae are required).
There's little in ICOA's way as far as putting up these towers goes and charging monthly for access in greater areas, aside from the cost of building such infrastructure (which is real, and fairly large (another reason it took them a while to start making profits)). I doubt they will be in that market too soon, it would certainly take time even if they do/did have plans for it, but it's not unfeasible for them to provide something extremely similar to what you have with Sprint.
Now as far as Mango's point about taking the cost away from end users, and the way this is limiting ICOA's income, I'll admit that it could limit the upper-bound of their income. But at the same time it's much cheaper for them to provide. When I said more people have devices to access wifi, you only seemed to look at the direct market: selling to these users. But one also has to look at how this can work as marketing: store owners can use this fact to bring more customers to their stores (i.e. Not ICOA's) and keep them in there longer. For many stores this is a very good thing, and they will be willing to pay for the systems and access in order to market it to their clients.
And before you ask "why don't they just go to a standard ISP and hook up a wireless router?" I'll go right ahead and tell you there's a lot more to public WiFi than that. Most locations will require customers to ask for a key, or to "sign in" somewhere so that they can keep track of who's online at what times. You need systems in place to track who does what, otherwise in many jurisdictions any illegal activities performed on the network can be pinned on the host. To avoid this (and let's face it, people will try to use these networks for various illegal activities) they need a way to track who's doing what, and when (of course while keeping everything nicely encrypted to protect certain private informations). There's a lot that goes into setting up systems like this.
So yes, few $ per location, but more locations available. This is worse than getting money from the end-user, but it still has huge potential earnings.
So, basically, it's cheaper for the consumers (the end users) because it's free. It's a less costly process for the locations considering the work involved in setting up a proper semi-public wifi hotspot. It's useful for marketing in the modern day where just about every device has wifi built in.
I don't think you can base their current earnings on their previous efforts, not in this industry anyways. There's several reasons why you have little basis for this, but most importantly is this:
Technology changes. The internet changes. It has changed a lot in the past decade, you know that. What was the internet like 20 years ago? More importantly how large was the market for people who would A) have devices that could access it at hotspots, such as starbucks? B) feel a requirement or desire to pay to use such services?
You'll notice that the casual users have entered into both those markets, but you also have to remember that this has only really happened in the past decade.
On top of that in the first 15 years of their run internet was both more costly and slower. Even as recently as 2000, statistics show, that 74% of US households still ran dial-up, 56k, internet.
Nearly everything they serve is becoming less expensive to them and more powerful. Stronger wavelengths are being freed up to send their services along. Stronger access to "the web" is becoming more and more available. Couple that, the fact that it costs less for them to provide the service, with a hugely expanded market, and you'll see why you shouldn't make assumptions on their current earnings based on the first 15 years. The industry went through massive shifts in recent years. Plus, they knew they had problems before, that's why their changing their corporate strategies so heavily. They're trying to fix up a few weaknesses.
I could be wrong, so don't take any of this as fact, but I was under the impression that it was all from OS, where some of the OS is float and the rest is held (and 4.5billion of those held are restricted for a while); but that, according to the conversation let_it_rain had with George, the shares retired won't all come from the restricted 4.5 billion mentioned earlier. People seemed to assume they were all going to be the 4.5 billion restricted ones, probably because those were only revealed a couple weeks back (i.e. the repeated number made people assume they were the same).
So the old share count said:
Outstanding Shares: 5,387,363,273 as of Aug 31, 2010
Authorized Shares: 10,000,000,000 as of Sept 18, 2008
Float (shares): 887,213,273
(and you'll see the OS is the Float + 4500150000 (about 4.5 billion, plus a few extra))
But now it's been revealed that the Float is probably quite a bit larger than previously mentioned, and OS in general as well. (let_it_rain states :"He said the numbers may be slightly different but is not expecting anything surprising.")
So basically what I gathered from this is that the shares are intended to be entirely from the OS, but not only from the restricted shares they hold: the retired shares will also be from the (now larger than previously thought) Float as well.
It's a good thing, IMO, because if they were removing them all from restricted shares then they would be removing them from a pool that isn't to be traded until 2013. Taking these away doesn't affect the number of shares that can trade hands on a daily basis. Plus, this would give them tons of extra leg room for diluting (so into the float) w/r/t the AS. Whereas the Float can be traded now, and so they have current value. Taking away a portion of those means fewer shares that can trade, day to day, which should help PPS. Basically it's better for the ratio of locked:trade-friendly shares if they take more from Float.
That last paragraph is assuming they still plan to keep some of the OS locked - if that's not the case then ignore that!
It was the total volume at the time. I didn't take a screen shot because I was at school, but it was exactly equal to the volume at occurrence. If you subtract every trade since then from the day's total volume I'm certain you would get the same number (as that transaction).
It's not the same as the total volume right now because trades occurred after it went through. It seems most likely that it was a bug/glitch somewhere, in some system.
1x6 [ETMM] and 1x7 [NITE] (of course market's not open yet, it will likely change quickly).
Also shows 4x.0005 and 1x.0008 behind them
Only one more on 0006 - ETMM!
Up another 1.3million, lets push this up!
6x.0005
4x.0006
Haha, yeah I guess so. Bickering over mundane, geeky details always helps brighten the day a little (though I'm not sure the girlfriend would hsare my point of view on this!)
Looks like it's going to be a wonderful week for ICOA!
No, I know. I didn't mean he was right in the wires to individual houses. But to units, perhaps, or to hotels, etc. All I was saying is the nodes that they do set up are likely connected elsewhere via cable, and so running cables into wherever they provide service is more likely than not. I mean he did say "Apt buidings, commercial, etc.", not just housing. I figure it's extremely likely that installing their wifi transmitters they use (or at least used, in previous year; whether they continue to depends on how heavily over-the-air transmittal grows) cables.
It was silly semantics, being argued by someone whose probably got less sleep than he might require (me, not you).
Well that has two important aspects depending on whether we're talking about new or old technology:
Old:
With old technology they would likely put a few well placed routers/antennae between the homes, or if it were small enough one powerful central one. But this would still likely have a wire connecting it (the antenna) to another location where ICOA would hold servers/etc.
New:
With newer solutions like WiMAX being allowed the transmittal radius is growing significantly. A single central node could provide wifi to a small town. It can provide data over a couple dozen miles. So far fewer of these nodes are required.
That said WiMAX isn't exactly the same as wifi. It's extremely similar, but there's no saying whether ICOA uses technology like this. Plus I haven't seen any statistics for the newly opened channels for wifi - they could potentially be more significant and a better move to take.
But the key to old-style wifi, if they were doing it on a pay-per-use system (which is what I gather, they do) is to set it up in population dense areas where people are either willing to pay to surf (i.e. wealthy) or may require internet for other reasons. It could be extremely lucrative in either situation, and I think we can see that from how ICOA's done!
I wasn't trying to put anything against ICOA (why would I? I'm currently investing in them and would love the price to increase, not decrease!) I was simply saying that most wifi vendors would likely use plenty of wires in setup, just as long as the user doesn't have to know about them. It's better to, it's faster.
Well that's not entirely true. The wifi usually consists of an antennae, somewhere, connected with cables to some servers that the ISP (which, I suppose, here would be ICOA)holds. It's much faster this way than having things entirely wireless (but, of course, it is theoretically possible to have extended wireless wifi that jumps between nodes, or connects to a satellite, but it's usually much more effective to have some cables involved.
(of course this is all changing with solutions like WiMAX, but in common practice I would expect a wireless ISP like ICOA to use wires to connect the location to the internet - the wireless aspect comes into play from the end user's experience; the user never sees any of the wires)
Up 6 in the past 12 hours.
I wish I had more liquid in my account to snatch more up! After it breaks the 5s, who knows where it will end tomorrow, the day after, etc.
Unfortunately only got my hands on 3.7million, really regret not having picked up more!
GO ICOA!
He's mixing ROFL and LMAO. It's an over the top form of LOL (laugh out loud)
Looking great so far today too. Everything's been on the ask so far; it hasn't budged at all :)
Looks like it will be a good day for ICOA!
We need more slaps on the ASK today. I picked up 1000000, sadly that's all the liquid $ in my account would allow...
Go ICOA!
Well you are, aren't you? ;)
(Note: I'm not, at the moment, but that's entirely because I don't have the open funds to do so)
But isn't everything? LOL
The week can't start soon enough. Perhaps an 18 hour nap's in order!
Maybe it seems expensive from an opportunity cost POV (i.e. whatever you make buying at .0002 and selling at .003 will be 50% greater than having bought at .0003 and sold at .003 (brokerage fees ignored)). Because, you know, gaining 900% in profits isn't good enough! Haha
Monstrous volume today! Going through the historical it seems we've broken 20million twice in the past year: the previous two days accounting for both. Here we are, an hour into trading with a volume of nearly 21 million.
Going up!
Dropped just long enough to let me sell off some other investments and free up a few $; in at 100k! Looks like it's going to be a wonderful day!
The cheap shares are running out; the ask is rising: more shares in less faltering hands, let's hold strong for the big run!