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.
No. It couldn't. Your complaint to the SEC means absolutely nothing to the state of this stock.
Do you think it would make more sense to release contract info before audited financials, or after?
I think I would prefer financials just after new year, followed by domestic contract news, then the share reduction news. And maybe then we could get the CE and European contracts, followed by the uplisting announcement. That would be a VERY solid 1Q
Edit: I like the contract before the share reduction because it brings in a different crowd at the beginning. Then, with the share reduction, we would get the flippers trying to move back in to keep the momentum going forward.
A 100MM OS with the current earnings guidance would become closer to a .02 EPS
In an ideal trading scenrio this would give a PPS of .20 - .30 (P/E of 10-15)
Note, though, that the market for HNSS has never been anywhere close to ideal. The company will have to beat out the shorts and the daytraders to get this out of the cellar.
Retail buying isn't budging the PPS, no matter the quantities. Unless we can get a couple MM on the tape in a 10-15 minute period, they can keep bidwhacking us to new lows. IMO, we're all better off waiting for the company to make the next move.
I think you mean 85-90% off.
remember this stock is trading well below where it should be .05+ IMO..it's frustrating I know but it will come around..think of it as a 500% OFF SALE or more
I've wondered the same thing myself, Oscar.
What if MM1 sells short to MM2, then MM2 sells short to MM1 to cover MM1's position... Theoretically this is like them creating FREE MONEY for themselves, but there is a lot of risk involved in it.
The fact is, when they short that many shares, a big chunk will end up owned by retail buyers, so they still end up with a growing number of short shares they are accountable for.
I've tried to put together a scenario where the MM's can do this and come out making money, but the only way that happens is if shareholders SELL when the price goes down.
As long as there isn't a large selloff by actual shareholders, the shorts can't win. Unfortunately, everyone has a point where they get tired of waiting, and move on to something else. When this happens, that's when the MM takes profit. If they can keep it in the cellar long enough, that is what they believe will happen.
I'm really excited to see where this goes over the next couple of months.
IMO, whether it's Grofe or another insider, $67k at .0001 equals about 67m shares that went into the float which is how it got to 90m.
This would be 670MM shares.
As long as the company is making money, as they have reported they are, the MM's can do whatever they want to the PPS and I will continue to accumulate.
At some point, the pps will accurately reflect the value of the company. Whether this happens on the PS, BB, or AMEX, I don't know, but it is looking more and more as if a move is coming.
Do you read this as all restrictions have been lifted and the TOTAL OS is 90MM, or The Total OS is somewhere around 120-150 still, but 60MM restricted hit the float to bring it to 90MM?
The Company expects to report net income of $.011 per share on 188 million shares outstanding (based upon the weighted average of shares outstanding for the year), which is $2 million net income (including net income from operations of $700,000 or $.004 per share) on total revenue of $2.3 million. The current float of outstanding stock is 90 million shares. All figures are approximate.
MM's are keeping this liquid by offering an endless supply of short shares.
What is likely happening these days is naked shorting where a broker is actually borrowing against stock that isn't available (naked shorting). There are in fact no physical shares that the shorts are borrowing against. Instead they are making phantom shares to borrow against which are not part of the float or O/S.
Thanks for this, Punk. I'm still a little confused however. Are you saying that a 'buy to cover' order CAN NOT be filled with short shares or naked short shares?
Can someone please tell me if this is possible?
MM1 sells 1MM shares short to MM2 and 400M shares short to retail. MM2 owns 1MM shares.
MM2 sells 1.4MM shares short to MM1 and 560M shares short to retail, thus covering MM1's short commitment. MM2 owns 1MM shares still, and MM1 now owns 1.96MM shares.
MM1 sells 1.96MM shares short to MM2 and 784M shares short to retail, covering MM2's short commitment. MM2 now owns 3.744MM shares and MM1 owns 1.96MM shares.
The MM's let the price run up, then they sell their accumulated short shares for big profit.
After they get rid of their NSS, they short the pps back down to the .008 - .012 range and cover the remaining short position.
Rinse. Repeat.
What can stop this process? Constant buying pressure alone can not. We have to keep the buying pressure on, while the company releases good information to make new people WANT to keep the buying pressure on.
I still haven't found anything to debunk my personal theory that the short shares are being traded back and forth between MM's to keep the pps down for them to load as many shares as they can from people who get bored/nervous.
If ETMM and NITE each have 2MM shares short at any time, they can buy back real shares from each other to cover, keep a lower balance, and not have too much at risk. At the same time they accumulate a larger and larger position.
The problem with that theory is that they have to short to retail buyers as well, and those shares would become increasingly harder to cover. With the float seemingly locked, the shares that MM's actually have, would be diminishing because they would end up covering from their own pocket.
I missed out on most of the action here today, waiting for a dip now.
Seems like a similar situation is brewing with HN$$, waiting for the spark to send that one up.
As soon as those .012's fall, ETMM will jump down to .0099 again.
Edited, TY
There has been plenty of news the last 2 months.
Sale of MedBioWeb.
New Machines.
European expansion.
$1.95MM net revenue for 2k10.
Plus the implied O/S reduction.
Do some DD please before posting.
Edit (Thank you Asimee for pointing out my order of magnitude mistake)
That link doesn't address any of my questions.
I'm trying to go through some of the 'short' logic and can't come up with a good explanation. Why would the MM's continue to short this stock after the news today? Why would they have gone to such links to short this continuously for weeks upon weeks?
Is it possible that the shorting we see is the MM's shorting to each other?
Day 1: MM1 sells 100M short shares to MM2 @ .008
Day 2: MM2 sells 100M short shares to MM3 @ .008
Day 3: MM3 sells 100M short shares to MM1 @ .008
And then the cycle could repeat.
This would keep the pps low, keep their pockets protected, and entice selling from bored or scared investors.
Any real selling could be bought up by the MM's.
After they have all the shares they need, they can ease off the shorting, ride the pps up to the new high, and profit from their scheme.
Yes. Filled at 134.
MM's are holding orders in the 13's.
I've been open at the ask with Etrade for more than 14 minutes. We are moving higher today.
The problem is, it's always 'thin' until someone hits the ask and then the MM's move DOWN and start shorting.
I'd just like to point out that an A/D calculation would show 100% of today's volume as accumulation, while anyone watching can see that most of the day was spent at the low until someone provided a boost at the bell.
This is why I don't understand the significance of the A/D chart. I can't see any value from this formula in the pinks.
I can think of several reasons for dumping at bid or below. The quickest being a hedge against multiple transaction fees by selling in larger AON blocks at a lower price rather than sell the entire quantity and wait for small blocks to fill.
This is a flawed statement from the offset, because you won't be filled for larger AON blocks. To keep the market liquid, smaller sells would go through first.
Nice post punk, but I would like to modify your calculation to put a high/low range for a single machine.
High: Continuous Operations, 2160ppm * 60m * 24h * 7d * 50w * 0.80 eff = 870,912,000 pads/year.
Low: Single 12 hour shift, 2160ppm * 60m * 12h * 5d *50w * 0.80 eff = 311,040,000 pads/year.
This doesn't account for any efficiency gains/losses associated with a larger workforce, startup/shutdowns, etc.
More realistically I would say the true range would be somewhere between 280,000,000 and 750,000,000 pads/year, but I don't know enough about the machines and how involved the operators would be in the process to narrow it down more than that.
This makes a LOT more sense than dilution. I'm with you 100%. But it would be nice for the company to TELL us something.
Thanks Punk.
It's good to see a board where people state opinions based on facts, rather than just blindly stick to the same pump/dump arguments. You've earned 1 Person Mark.
I don't understand why people look to the A/D as a dilution signal. All it does is place a 0 baseline between the HOD and LOD, index each of them to 1 and see where the close falls in relation to that baseline.
I guess my point and question is that the A/D doesn't take into account the volume @ specific prices, so if 2,000,000 shares are bought at .009 at the open, then 10 10k sells step it down to .0075, then it rebounds to close @ .008 with a 200k power hour, we show a day of distribution because we would have 2,300,000 * ((.0005-.0010)/.0015) = -766,666. Why is this helpful?
Also, Why would the MM's short here, instead of letting it step up to the .02/.03 range and short it back to these levels?
If shorting is the cause of the low pps, what needs to happen in order to overcome the shorts?
They have already shown that news/prs/buybacks can't stop them.
Has anyone recieved a response from the company regarding the CURRENT share structure? Is there any proof that there is ZERO dilution? I only ask, because until the company makes a statement, this could very possibly be dilution.
I had one of those back on the 6th too Punk. I emailed the company at contact@healthnostics.com but recieved no response.
I did get from Bryan at the TA that it isn't a HNSS gag, its just this particular TA's policy to direct questions to the company.
You're still being unfair. The point the OP was making was NOT that the company is going to let the pps erode before the buyback, to benefit themselves.
The point is that these are some questions that could potentially be keeping investors on the fence. For that reason, his points are entirely legitimate.
I am familiar with the company's actions, and I'm sure the OP is as well.
His second scneario is not saying that people don't want profits, he's saying that people who could potentially be accumulating 500k blocks to sell back are hesitant because they would prefer to accumulate at these prices and see how high the pps goes AFTER the buyback. This seems to me unlikely, but some new investors may think this way.
Scenario 3 is also VERY legitimate. Our powder will eventually dry up and without some new money coming in, the shorts can take us back to the 00 levels. This is a point that has been made by several others on this board when they keep bringing up the need for news to stop the shorts from driving us down on low volume.
We're all on the same side here.
The volume at 12/13 the past couple days is going to leave us with harder resistance around the 17/20 range when we go back up, won't it?
Or is it more likely that we blast through to the 22/24 range where we peaked after the buyback news?
Thanks again. Seems the most likely explanations then, are that Scrag's order was such a larger portion of the volume that they decided to hold Scrag's order off the tape to help the market remain liquid. Also could be new big players coming in.
Thanks guys, I didn't think it was the D. As a more general question would be, Are the after hours settlements not dilution because there isn't any dilution occurring, or because they can not hide dilution from the tape? This is kind if tangential, but I'm curious nonetheless.
Not that it matters, but the after hours bid/ask is 0.001/.050 right now.
Also, could the 't-trades' be dilution? I'm not trying to cry wolf, but are they allowed to hold dilution shares until after hours to hide it? The reason I ask is because I have sent a couple emails to contact@healthnostics.com about the share structure and gotten no replies. The TA is gagged as well.
I don't see that happening from here, but after yesterdays power hour anything is possible.
Where are you pulling these numbers from pw? I'm not being antagonisitic, I just would appreciate being able to sift through some of the data.
I had that same feeling, but then theey dropped to .0195/.020 at the open. Should get a little volume before it clogs up and shoots back to the 24/27 range
I tried to slap @23, and got filled at 21 and 20.
Does this mean that people aren't selling, and the MM's had took the opportunity to lower the price?
Were there any orders being held @ .015 during the dry spell, that got filled at the lower price on the eod dump?