Y'know, KS, that's a good point that is worth underlining. There aren't too many subpennies that have had actual EPS for several quarters in a row, and I wouldn't be surprised if eventually some P&D email newsletter guy "picks" EIPC uncompensated to try to build his list for the paid pumps. You saw it happen with M*RS....

Hey Rich! Haven't seen you around these parts before - welcome. I agree with you, that was (and may continue to be) major dumpage. But I still think EIPC is a good (I used to say "great") wildcard.

Sorry, that makes no sense to me. We saw 3-1/2 million real, actual shares sold (and bought) today, and the weak hands are long gone. You can't look at one offer being pulled back momentarily as evidence of anything. Also, the trades in that time period were at .035, and the big seller(s) went down to .033 later, so there was nothing fake about their desire to sell.

Second, anyone who would want to "shake out weak hands" would want the stock price to look weak to induce selling, so painting the tape would be the precise opposite of what that person would want to do. I don't know who the tape painter is, but he or she is engaged in a fairly pointless exercise.

Finally, there are a couple of people on IHub who like to try to find *patterns* in trading of penny stocks - don't be one of them.

Avert your eyes!

I don't understand. Are you suggesting that whoever sold all those shares today didn't really want to sell them - but only wanted to shake other people out?

By what?

Wonder if it's going to be acquired. If not, someone is still buying up a large stake.

1. Does this little touch of paranoia and conspiracy theory remind you just a bit of someone who likes to post about *patterns*?

2. Why, oh why, do these noobs not understand that there is [virtually always] a seller for every buyer on the Pinks?

WOW, the MM's played leap frog on level 2 for most of the day trying to keep the SP down and even did a 12 1/2 cent trade for 1 share so they could hit the low of the day. At the time of the 1 share sell @ .1261 XXXX had a 200 share sell @.14 and then 38,400 shares in 3 buys @ .15. Then came the BIG 1 share sell @ .1261. LOL

Looks like big support came in the last hour and 15 minutes as there was 6 buys for over 128,000 shares from .159-.17. Then of course,those wacky MM's tried to do their thing again by trying to hold the SP down by doing a 136 share and then a 20 share sell, worth a whole $23.12 and $3.40 respectively. LOL

So todays buys vs sells were 166,473 buys vs 357 sells. Looks like some good support and accumulation today.

Wonder what they may attempt tomorrow??? LOL

GO XXXX!!!

1. That link is old news. It is the website of some promoter I'm not familiar with, unchanged for many months, and I would not rely on it.

2. AVNE is not "Medscience Laboratories." AVNE (Aventura Equities, Inc.) is the parent company of Renewed World Energies, Inc., the developer of a proprietary technology for use in the manufacturing of algae oil. Although there was some speculation that AVNE might enter into some sort of business relationship with that private company, I would prefer to rely on AVNE's own public filings than unnamed promoters and speculation by message board posters.

3. Medscience Laboratories' one-page website has been taken down, so I don't even know if the company still exists (or if it ever existed), but when it was active it did not indicate any formal affiliation with AVNE.

4. "There hands" should be "their hands." Or, since IEquity is singular, try "its hands."

Yeah, I get your point, but in this case, the stock has traded between .78 and .88 for the past 17 trading days. Why would any mythical evil short-selling market maker care (or why should ANYONE care) whether it officially closes at .815 or .85 today?

We don't have a thread for "dumb statements about how the market works by people who should know better," do we? This one doesn't really fit here or on the Kool-Aid board:

8400 shares were bought at 0.85 (the bid being 0.81 and the ask 0,85) and our beloved market maker processed it at 4:00:04. Same thing happened yesterday. Those willing to buy at the close without a trading platform better not send their orders after 3:59:00. Market makers love these tricks...

This guy claims to have managed money for others for many years yet, like many on IHub, refuses to understand the difference between the daily short volume report and real short interest. Now we also know that he thinks a benign late print a few seconds after the close is a market maker "trick." I have no idea what he thinks the "trick" was intended to accomplish.

It could, if it is Pump Time. Does this flurry of posting activity signify that it is indeed Pump Time?

No, you're probably right - I've spent no time at all following their product development. No matter how you slice it, last I saw their sales of CYIPRO were still zero.

If by "new product" you're referring to the mystical and wondrous CYIPRO, it has been "up and running" for several years -- the only problem is that they just can't seem to sell any of it. But the stock is very thinly traded and the company will pay for another promo eventually, so buying for a penny or less may not be a bad speculation.

Yep. And almost all of the Kool-Aid drinkers believe that it's always a market maker on the other side of the trade for its own account, rather than real live sellers (or the company itself) dumping via the MM into the accounts of those eager "accumulating" buyers. I don't remember exactly when small retail traders became able to have their orders directly represented by MMs and displayed in Level II for OTCBB and Pink Sheet stocks, but it was 10+ years ago, anyway.

Yet another case of savvy investors facing off against manipulative market makers, in a .23 pinkie:

It is clear, MMs trying to keep this at bay.... someone in the know is buying. JMHO

XXXX and it’s actions have been , over the years, beyond approach.

same poster:
I consider myself a friend.

Saw a bunch of them on a stock I watch. Did you see it between 2:00 and 2:15? Reminded me of those test deposits that are sent to your bank account when you want to link accounts for online payments.

Something to do with the temple of Angkor Wat? I'm pretty sure they have a God Room.

Too much caffeine, maybe?

Hugh's brother, perchance?

Nice job guys. I have to say, I was skeptical about the $5.00 offering price, but it does look as though what I said below may be occurring.

"One of two things will happen (or maybe both): the trading price on the Pinks will drift up to meet the price in the S-1 if and when it goes effective, and/or the S-1 price will be reduced to a point where the company thinks it can sell the shares."

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93148702

DeRoos. DeRose? Derose? It's scary that he can't even spell the CEO's name. Sure makes one wonder about his overall attention to detail and the accuracy of his other statements.

Once again, for the intellectually curious who would prefer reality, daily "short volume" is not the same thing as "short interest."

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=54296242

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=91679926

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=93480092

Absolutely correct. 140 million shares fully diluted would not be too many if the company's revenues were to increase. Besides, the trading float is a fraction of that, so the stock price would probably move pretty easily (once significant sales are announced) if DMRJ were to stop selling. Traders would have to lose the mindset of buying and selling for small profits, but based on my experience I would expect the stock price to break out of its recent range within a few days after the sales news.

So I think what you're telling me is

THE FLOAT IS LOCKED!!

Is that it? In which case, we're going to see the MOASS!

Yes, I am certain, and this statement is not correct:
So an offer to sell 5 shares shows up as 100.

Actually, any size less than the minimum - in this price range it is 100 shares - will not be displayed on Level II at all. 101 shares available and 199 shares available will both be rounded down and displayed as 100. 99 will not show up at all, but if the same market maker has two or more orders that meet the minimum size when added together, the total of the orders will be posted (and rounded down to the nearest increment of 100).

You see 100 because that is the minimum to display and, contrary to popular belief, market makers do not always have to display the actual size they have available - so 100 could mean 100, or it could mean a larger size.

I do not think that anyone suggested any deception on the part of any “evil mm games”. . . The gentleman you were answering simply suggested if someone bought one share of a lot offered for sale and showing as 100 shares that purchase of one share may very well be telling

Another poster erroneously used the word "deception" to describe this routine practice:
Thanks for exposing yet another example of the deception used to try and manipulate investors.

I love these people who apparently have special decoder rings that allow them to determine whether a trade was a normal, everyday sale of real live shares vs. a naked short sale.

Also, if a bid is out there for 200 shares and 1 share is filled the bid then shows for only 100 shares.

As it should be. The displayed bid rounds down to the next hundred. This is not "deception" or part of "evil MM games," as some here might suggest.

Of course, it still boggles my mind that anyone seriously believes that any market maker is worried about the trading in an illiquid stock whose dollar volume is a few thousand dollars a year.

So all this AVNE/MedScience trademark talk is pretty premature then?

Hypotheticals piled on top of hypotheticals.

Come on now, you can read pretty well. I think it's pretty clear that I did not say that. The fact is, I don't know or care what IEquity did or didn't do, and you won't see me speculating about them. This is the AVNE board, not the IEquity board, and AVNE has been an algae/renewable energy play since the time I invested in 2010.

Small Cap Voice says this ticker is now MedScience Laboratories.

I don't know who Small Cap Voice is, but I'd rather rely on AVNE's own public filings. Their latest quarterly report is late but should be filed within a few days. At present, AVNE is the parent company of Renewed World Energies, Inc., which is an algae company, and has never disclosed any formal business relationship with MedScience Laboratories (TM).

*IF* some such hypothetical relationship were to be announced in the future, and
*IF* MedScience Laboratories (TM) were to continue using that corporate name, and
*IF* some third party were to object to the use of that corporate name on trademark grounds and send a "cease and desist" letter to MedScience Laboratories (TM), and
*IF* MedScience Laboratories (TM) were to continue to use that corporate name in defiance of the "cease and desist" letter, and
*IF* there were no indemnification provision in AVNE's agreement with MedScience Laboratories (TM) providing that as between the two corporations, MedScience Laboratories (TM), and not AVNE, would be liable for any claims, damages and expenses arising out of a hypothetical trademark infringement...

THEN, AND ONLY THEN, would MedScience Laboratories (TM)'s hypothetical liability for use of that corporate name be relevant to AVNE.

You're right, this trademark stuff is probably off-topic unless and until AVNE announces that it actually has some relationship with Medscience Laboratories. This has been hinted at but not confirmed. I don't mind going off topic briefly as long as it is factual, constructive and respectful, which I think this discussion has been, but there's no reason to get bogged down in trademark matters.

I'm not talking about a specimen, and I don't know anything about what was done with Medical Greens. I am referring to registering a mark that includes a design element, or logo. This is a trademark filing, not copyright.

"The stylized/design format, on the other hand, is appropriate if you wish to register a mark with a design element and/or word(s) and/or letter(s) having a particular stylized appearance that you wish to protect."

http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/mark.jsp

logo's get copyright protection, words get trademarked

Better do a little more research on that. When I do a trademark filing I file the logo too.

So what's the point of telling all of us that now? I call BS.

Agreed. I guess there are some more shares in the float now, but since the float was so tiny before, it shouldn't have much trouble getting back to at least .01-.02 with any good news.

Why is it that every time a stock drops, someone claims manipulation? Hope you were able to lighten up your position into the pump.

Speaking as an attorney who has had small public companies as clients: nonsense. You'd have to come up with a lot more than that to make a credible allegation of breach of fiduciary duty. A small company is entitled to legal representation and the company's lawyer is entitled to be paid the fair value of his time.