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.
Fact: nobody knows where this stock will be a year from now.
1 month ago did you know it would be in the 3's today or did you know it would be in Pennyland???
Please clarify.....did you mean pop to the down side?
You already stated as fact, and even sent several posts to further confirm that you had direct email confirmation from Peabody that the documents were submitted to FINRA.
You refused to post that email and have since deleted the post where you said you had the email.
Now you need clarity and confirmation of such??
If you have the email where it he confirmed it to you, why do you need more and why won't you share it?
It's one thing to speculate and guess about what Peabody has or hasn't done, but when someone states something as fact and goes as far as to say they have an email from Peabody that proves what they are saying, and then a week later they delete their post, and retract what they said by telling others to email Peabody to find out if Peabody did what he said he would do, it's just wrong.
Funny how you deleted the post where you stated you received an email from Peabody in which he confirmed to you that the documents were submitted to FINRA by 2-28.
Now you are posting that "we" need to email him and ask if the documents were submitted to FINRA.
That's pretty shady.
You said you had the email but you refused to post it in order to keep your good relationship with Peabody.
How about you post that email now. I'm sure nobody will tell him you did.
Really??
Really?
A few days ago you said you had received confirmation directly from Peabody that documents were submitted to FINRA by 2/28.
Now it appears you are in the dark, like the rest of us, on this item. What gives??
Where is the confirmation from Peabody that the docs were submitted to FINRA by 2/28, as he said would be done on 2-14?
Assuming the docs were submitted does not make it real. If it was done, wouldn't Peabody have plugged it in one of his updates since 2/27?
No docs submitted = no ticker change any time soon.
Yes, symbol change is out of company control, AFTER all documentation has been submitted.
Submitting the documentation is 100% in the control of the company and failing to do so only further delays any possible change.
You say "I believe" quite a bit. Based on what?
When Peabody tells us that all requested documentation has been given to FINRA, as he said would be done by 2-28, then all of us can believe.
It would take quite a while to go back just a year and point out all the things the CEO said were happening, but didn't.
How about the CEO saying all documentation would be submitted to FINRA by 2-28, but apparently that didn't happen either or he would have been happy to let us know by now.
Facts matter. Words of wisdom.
Hopefully you, and many of us holders, don't have to go through Fantasyland to get there.
How about the lack of content? That matters more actually.
Pumpers keep saying ticker change will happen at any moment and state as fact that FINRA documentation was submitted already, however no confirmation of this from the only person who knows, even though he keeps providing updates on speculative events that might happen. Or, might not.
How do you know paperwork was submitted yesterday to FINRA?? You state this as a fact.
Was it included in the 2-27 tweet that has so many hypotheticals of what they hope will happen?? No, there was no verbiage saying the paperwork was submitted.
Was it noted in the 3-1 supplemental release which speaks to the lawsuit? No, it was not mentioned.
Don't you think that if the paperwork was submitted by 2-28, which Peabody said would be done, that there would be a desire to announce what can only be viewed as positive news in order to a) let current investors know a critical item was completed, and b) give non-investors a reason to be investors in SRMX??
Back to original question: How do you know it was submitted yesterday?
Facts matter. Just sayin'.
Hey man, I'm a lady too and I don't care what gender someone is.
If one is going to post things as fact, but refuses to provide the confirmation they say they have, especially when they say they have it directly from the CEO, and it's a CEO who puts out tweets and information regularly, then there is a right to challenge it.
Most pumpers here say that the ticker change is "monumental" to this thing taking off, yet when the CEO advises the paperwork to facilitate the change happening will be in place by a certain date, 2-28 in this case, and it is past 2-28 with no update, except for one pumper saying she has a direct link to the CEO and he told her it was done, then for sure there can be questions about the legitimacy of what was or wasn't done on time and what is being alleged by that pumper.
Every day people post that the ticker change is happening at any moment but it can't happen until FINRA gets what they want and what the CEO told investors would be done by 2-28. If it was done, then great, let us know. If it wasn't done, then let us know why and when it will be done. Facts matter.
How can there be a ticker change when the documentation FINRA requires was not submitted by 2-28, as Peabody said it would be on 2-14?
You claim he told you it was submitted but where is the proof of that? No PR and not Tweets saying it was done and you don't want to share the email you got from P saying it was done.
Facts suggest it was not done.
So sweet that you have a good relationship with Peabody and he confides in you with pertinent information that he is responsible for providing to all investors and not just you.
Again, he provided updates in past days talking up alleged meetings and alleged pumps of what the future could be, so why didn't he address this important accomplishment critical to the alleged symbol change, if in fact it was done?
He told all of us on 2-14, that it would be done by 2-28, but as of 2-28, he has apparently only told you it was done.
No, this is not fishy at all..........
Funny how there is no response to this from someone who claims to have critical information directly from Peabody.
How about you post the email exchange between you and Peabody showing he told you the documents were submitted to FINRA?
Oh, of course it was a phone call so you can't post proof of what you say.
Facts matter. Lack of facts matter too.
Re: Lynns25 post# 40481
0
Post # of 40521
When did he tell you this and why, if this was done knowing it's fairly important and also beneficial to shareholders to hear it was done, was it not included in any of the recent updates??
The updates only talk about what is planned, what is hoped for, what could be possible, but this material fact was not included. Why, if it was done?
When did he tell you this and why, if this was done knowing it's fairly important and also beneficial to shareholders to hear it was done, was it not included in any of the recent updates??
The updates only talk about what is planned, what is hoped for, what could be possible, but this material fact was not included. Why, if it was done?
Does anyone think this is important??
Has anyone seen an update regarding the documentation that FINRA requested on February 9, which Peabody said would be submitted by today, 2-28, to get the Utah issue satisfied so the ticker change can move forward? Seems that this would have been noted in recent updates if it was done.
Speculation on rumors, hype with no proof, and guesses about price targets made based on rumors and hype are great, or not, but what about facts?
The FINRA documents were supposed to be submitted by today, per Peabody on 2-14. That's a fact.
With updates in past couple of days, confirmation of this being completed was not mentioned (unless I missed it). That's a fact.
If this was not done, and Peabody is not talking about it, then what does it mean?
Feel free to speculate since Peabody has not provided facts, and since some of you claim to have a direct line of communication with P, maybe you can ask him about this.
Has anyone seen an update regarding the documentation that FINRA requested on February 9, which Peabody said would be submitted by today, 2-28, to get the Utah issue satisfied so the ticker change can move forward? Seems that this would have been noted in recent updates if it was done.
Spanking new is fine, but where is the ugly current one? Gotta be in it to win it, so it appears CWIR is currently out of it while we're in it and losing?
Does this company have a working website?