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.
LOL. This one is barely in its adolescence.
I never said anything about evil MMs shorting every microcap in sight. Please do not inject fantasy land comments while I'm attempting to have a serious discussion.
The discussion is about ASCM being a short selling algo that comes in when a certain pattern emerges. There is a huge difference between the two scenarios.
Now you are putting words into my mouth to further discredit my observations and information.
Smooth.
Have a nice DAY.
People claiming that ASCM is not shorting is the conspiracy.
Look what happened when I made a passing comment about getting short this piece of junk ticker. Instead of just laughing it off (because you know it's supposedly impossible), you went on a multiple post defensive to uphold and perpetuate the lies that ASCM does not short.
Why the extreme protective measures of ASCM, when my comment was nothing more than a jab at BAYP to make a point that the ticker is toast? I even explained that my comment was no more than whimsical, but for some reason your protective measures got more intense.
What about my comment about bullets? You've separated all of my posts into segments so you could attack each segment out of context, like discrediting my information on ASCM because I said have a good night in the middle of the day.....that kind of nonsense. But when I suggest the method ASCM could be using to legally sell short, you ignore it.
You are obviously protecting ASCM.
I started daytrading when most of the world did not know the meaning of the word. The first thing my teacher taught me was how to identify buyers and sellers on L2. If anyone cares to trade trends, instead of mindlessly flipping for 1 or 2 ticks, identifying buyers and sellers is very important. It's an acquired skill. Bottom line, I know what I'm seeing, and ASCM is a short selling algo that kicks in when certain patterns emerge. Anyone believing anything different, does not know how to read L2, and/or does not understand the information they are seeing.
Let me tell you how easy it is to legally break shorting rules.
When I started trading in the late 1990s, one of the first rules I learned was the uptick rule. That's the rule that makes it illegal to hit bids to get short when the bid is in a downtick condition.
One morning the guy who ran the office told us about a product, aptly called a bullet, that would allow traders the privilege of hitting the bid on a downtick to get short. It was a fee based product and 1 bullet = 1000 shares. The bullets lasted for the entire day and would replenish like a line of credit. As you covered, the bullet shares would be immediately available to use again.
The uptick rule never changed, nor was it amended, but now if we purchased a bullet, it enabled us to in practice, break the published uptick rule legally, for a fee, with no special instructions, limitations, extra steps, or additional margin.
Does it say anywhere in the uptick rule that it's legal to use bullets to skirt the rule? Doubt it, but it is perfectly legal, even though it's a practice that is seemingly against the law.
You can reference all the SEC laws in the world, but anyone who understands how to read L2 and identify buyers and sellers will quickly realize that ASCM has found a legal way around the rules you are saying prove there is no OTC shorting. If it's not bullets, it's another type of product that allows for the same end result.
MMs don't have to worry about margin requirements like the 2.5 requirement for retail, becacuse it is the brokerages that make up those rules, and whatever fees these MMs are paying to purchase the privileges are small in comparison to the amount of money they drain out of stocks that are running for legitimate reasons.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bullettrade.asp
What's laughable is believing that ASCM pulls a puff the magic dragon act and comes up with all these huge blocks of long sale shares every time a random ticker trips his algo. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.
I'm saying there is enough financial information available to get an idea of what the new company is worth, not to come up with a concrete valuation.
Revenues are only part of the equation. They also have assets, contracts, credit agreements, etc.
Just wondering if anyone has done any numbers crunching.
Ok. Thanks for your evaluation of published literature on the subject.
You're eating my posts dude. I know what I see and you know what you read.
Have a nice night.
I agree. But how long do we think the wait will be for those filings? We could see them at any minute because the company can upload them to OTC Markets whenever they want.
I think we'll have a sling shot bounce from here, straight up when the filings hit, IMO.
The last thing we're waiting for is the first set of filings ever for our new company.
There is a lot of uncertainty about what those filings will show, but if anyone cares to do the research on all of the merged in companies, they would have a good idea of what this merger is worth....and I'm sure there are updated numbers from what's currently available online.
Plus, when we do get the filings, it's very possible that we could get another merger announcement. Anyone familiar with the 8k from 10/13/20 knows that there is another merger proposed that would allow the UL India and UL China divisions to merge into our newly formed company within 12 months.
I can't wait for that first set of filings to hit OTC Markets. IMO we are still extremely undervalued. Wishy washy trading is possible until we see those papers, but I know I'm not selling anything just yet!
The iBox has links to everything I talked about here. I recommend checking it out if anyone wants to dig into some juicy information!
Has anyone looked into the financials of the companies that have merged? Any revenue estimates for the group? What about their partners and subs? How much revenue will they add that's not apparent at first glance?
The more you dig, the clearer it becomes. No smoke and mirrors, this company is worth a lot of money.
There is no amount of literature in the world that can explain away what happens in real time on L2 every time certain situations come up.
ASCM doesn't magically get huge block sell orders every time a stock has the same movement and volume pattern. ASCM is a short selling algorithm that triggers when certain conditions exist.
If you want to continue to believe what you read that's fine. I know what I see and can identify it easily because I've seen the same thing on L2 in different markets over many years, and would even participate in this kind of strategy years ago when I traded with a group from an office.
It takes practice to be able to read L2 and understand what is happening. I understand that those without the practice have to fall back on what other people have written. It's ok, I don't mind explaining the reality of the situation to those people.
I just bought that 100 shares at .16 on etrade pro.
The problem with that scenario is, it doesn't account for the covering that takes place on the bid by the same MM.
A MM selling a huge block would not take steps to stop momentum and drive the PPS down, then sit on the bid lower and buy back the shares they just sold.
I see MMs all day long selling huge blocks, like ALPS and CFGN. They sell gargantuan blocks on the ask, but they don't turn around and sit on the bid and buy back what they just sold, like ASCM does.
Another problem with that scenario is, it doesn't account for why ASCM appears on the ask whenever a certain pattern emerges. It's the same situation every time, stock runs up quickly on high volume, as soon as it reaches a point where it would be easy to swing it the other way, ASCM comes in and relentlessly floods the ask with shares, creates a panic selling situation for all the longs, then covers lower on the bid.
That is not a MM selling a block for a client. I know what I see, and you know what you read. I'm not here to challenge what someone wrote. I'm explaining what I see on L2....believe it or not.
I read L2. I've seen the material posted over the years about OTC shorting. But watching L2 and seeing the actual shorting and covering happening right there, plain as day tells a different story.
You can throw whatever literature you want at me, but there's no mistaking a short attack on L2. I've been around the block more than a few times in these equity markets. I have shorted 100s of tickers 1000s of times over multiple decades. I know what shorting looks like on L2.
Whatever literature you have that says ASCM is not shorting into momo is incorrect.
Looks like we're halted while the brokers update their systems. Name and symbol have been updated everywhere, but I'm still missing some values in the position manager columns.
Looking for those fins....
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/UNQL/disclosure
I don't open the fantasy land book when I talk about OTC shorting, but when MMs like ASCM come in right after a pop and short the perceived top, it's extremely obvious what's going on. I've been watching L2 for 20+ years and one of the things I can do very well is identify buyers and sellers working L2. ASCM and OTCX are shorting MMs. OTCX will scalp for minuscule gains while ASCM looks for larger moves. It's the same MO every time with those two.
I didn't mean to open up a can of worms about OTC shorting. My original comment about this looking like a raging short was basically a statement that this ticker is toast, not something I'm considering acting on. I've got real companies making real moves to pay attention to. I don't get involved with scam tickers these days for any reason. BAYP was one of the first tickers I traded when I was new to OTC, like 5 years ago.
If you're going to insist ASCM and OTCX are not shorting MMs, maybe we should just abandon this conversation.
No subs for me. My lowest print is .0485.
Dollars are my thoughts also. We're still trading very conservatively. There is a lot of uncertainty about what the company valuation and revenues will be. The people following closely know what's about to happen.
If anyone is just joining us, I suggest taking a look at the iBox. It has all of the important merger information, as well as links to all of the individual companies coming together here. To view the iBox, click the "show intro" button in the upper right of the board title page (use a web version, not the app).
All of the rough financial information is available for the merging companies. The next filings will wrap it all together and give the market quite a shock, IMO.
New ticker: UNQL
OTC shorting and big board shorting are completely different. The only ones who can do it on OTC with any conviction are the slimebag MMs like ASCM and OTCX.
I got extremely comfortable shorting back in 2000 when NASDAQ was crashing down from it's then all time high of 5000. Either way, it's all the same to me. I have never....except by accident once or twice....traded pairs. I call that hedge trading, but it's definitely not my thing.
It was a theoretical proposal. Not so simple to do in practice.
Looks like a screaming short to me.
That makes sense when there's a split involved. I bet that one had a "D" added to the end of the ticker while that sorted out.
If we don't halt here, it would be my first time seeing it happen that way. The other tickers I was in that did halt for name or ticker change did not have splits at that time.
I'll keep my trading platform opened after the close and see if it changes to a code first or if it goes right to UNQL.
Yeah, I was expecting the code to show up in place of the symbol while everything is switched over.
Finra shows the effective date for the change is tomorrow Jan 14, so if we do halt it would have to be tonight.
Imagine where this would open if we halt tonight and get fins during the down time. The gap up would be huge IMO.
I thought a halt was necessary when name & ticker change. Every time I've been in a ticker that had these changes it was halted for days.
Maybe they switch to the new ticker overnight without a halt?
Either way, when the fins for all the merged parts are consolidated into one place, the PPS will adjust to actual company valuation pretty quickly IMO.
I have been practically holding class daily on why this happens with this ticker.
Learning how to identify buyers and sellers on L2 will reveal the answer.
Hey that 13k at .16 that's been frozen there just got chipped and changed its size to 12k!
Maybe we're seeing the actual number of shares offered now? One good slap and we'd know for sure.
Fins up next. This is a nice bump, but when all the merging parts of this company show their financial information in the same statement, that's when we'll see the mega move, IMO.
Today's progress should send a message that the company is working quickly and diligently to move forward with this project.
It is my opinion that filings will come quickly and will include an attorney letter with respect to current information.
New ticker: UNQL
Ticker change effective date: Tomorrow, Jan 14, 2021.
Thanks for the heads up jabrock1! I checked a few times this morning. It posted to Finra at 10:01am.
https://otce.finra.org/otce/dailyList?viewType=Symbol%2FName%20Changes
420 volume. Maybe that's a message? Smoke a fatty and everything will be fine?
Thank you for compiling that information and giving us your opinion of what it all means.
I'll welcome ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION that supports your claims, but apparently none exists. Surely if the scam is so huge, there must be dozens or hundreds of people speaking out in support of your fraud theory and trying to raise awareness. Where are the physicists and scientists, the industry experts, the whistle blowers, the litigation hungry lawyers, and the defrauded shareholders rallying to expose the deception? Please post the corroborating documentation from all of the other sources who support your opinions.
If a company makes an outright false claim and illegally inflates the stock price to multiple dollars, the SEC takes notice and gets involved quick. Just because they pay less attention to the trips and subs stocks being manipulated does not mean they turn a blind eye on the entire market.
GWSO is one of the biggest stories on the entire OTC right now. There is no way the SEC would let them continue to trade if it was a fraud.
Ok. There's always a 100% chance the stock will go up or down. Thanks for your insightful prediction.
I am not frustrated with the process. I understand the process and I see it's working fine here. The company has delivered all the relevant information in the latest 14C filing, which was posted on Dec 8, 2020. Since then we've had a courtesy year end message to shareholders and updates to NV SOS reflecting the exact corporate changes the 14C filing discusses.
I don't agree with any opinion that says this is taking too long, and I am certainly not worried that the merger is going to get abandoned.
The low volume games continue. The accumulation program was running full steam again today, and they got a lot of shares. They use CDEL and ETRF mostly. Very easy to spot the game and identify their trickery.
I'm not here to convince anyone to buy or sell, I just want people to have all the information before they make decisions.
I don't know if you're joking or what. Every time you reply to me the sentiment is 100% opposite than the previous time. Sorry, but I can't entertain stuff like this.
Where is your proof that the company's PR's are pump and dumps? You are stating your own personal opinion, which is fine, but there is no supporting documentation to quantify that opinion.
Find me some supporting documentation that upholds your claims. Otherwise I will continue to agree with the stock market, the EV power market, the physics community, the CEO, and the SEC that the information presented by GWSO is accurate.
Thank you for posting your opinions and personal interpretation of this company.
If you would post some corroborating documentation other than your own analysis of company information and undertakings, I would be more inclined to look into the claims. There is no technical data, no third party verification, and no other personal opinions that I can find to support your claims.
I personally cannot uphold the notion that the company, CEO and a couple of sneaky note holders perpetrated such a colossal fraud, and continue with this felonious undertaking, as they intentionally fool the market into buying worthless shares using fake news about false technology....all without attracting the attention of the SEC. I need something more than an opinion of one person to take such claims seriously.
The people you are accusing would be in handcuffs already if what you claim is true.
All I am seeing you provide is your own personal opinions.
What qualifies you to claim that these technology achievements are an impossibility? Have you had an extensive physics background, or been exposed to numerous alternative battery technologies? Have you ever worked in the EV power industry?
Do you hold any documentation that would make your opinions hold more weight than a layperson outside of the industry?
You are still saying the same thing and providing none of the documentation needed to back up your claims.
What other information do you have, other than your personal opinion, that supports your claim(s) that the technology and company is "hogwash"?
IMO absurd is when a claim is made with no supporting documentation. I have listened to your claims, now please provide the documentation.
Please answer the questions:
Again, can you provide current documentation that proves the technology is false?
Referencing the company's past research, quarterly reports, and share exchanges does not provide any information relevant to my question. I have been reading your posts and I am aware of your observations and claims. Is there any concrete evidence, aside from the company information you've presented, to corroborate your claims?
I would like to see actual 3rd party documentation that proves the technology is false. Can you provide anything like that?
Can you document any instances of investors filing complaints with the SEC regarding false GWSO technology?
When a penny stock moves to $3+, you can bet the SEC takes notice.
If the technology was false, there would be countless stories outlining how and why it was false, plus there would be hoards of investors filing complaints with the SEC.
Can you provide documentation that the technology is false, or is it speculation based on the perceived share selling scheme?