If 88% is insider owned, that only leaves 12%

12% x 14,264,273 O/S = ~1.7 million shares in the float

... we should be able to buy that up, I'm just a college student and I own 3.5% of that. Perhaps we should build a spreadsheet? It wouldn't be hard to accurately keep track of so few shares

I agree, this looks as promising as any play I've ever been a part of

sounds like there's a lot of ways this could go down, back to wait and find out mode I suppose

what types of filings are you expecting?

well, now it seems that there has been a sc 13d/a filed for all 5 of the selling parties ... we should get the 8k now, right? Or do we need more filings before that?

I called the TA but it went to voice mail when I was transferred ... I think whoever said 11 billion was blowing smoke

In my experience if it gaps it will fill or come damn close, regardless of how hard everyone here pumps it ... you should get filled there at some point if not at the opening bell

.0007-.0008 IMO

I love the bit about stock being held for his children ... things like that tend to be the best indicators in my experience

oh nvm ...

Form 3 out

instead of spamming the boards someone should just recruit one fairly well to do trader to buy up the float himself ... if the officers own 88% then only 12% of the shares are free trading, that's only 1.7 million shares and that doesn't even count what retail holds. Are we close to 1.7 million ourselves?

that's all I've got

Thanks, lets hope we have a lot more success here than my last experiments with pink sheets long term investments

three partials later I'm in for 25,000 ...

I know, crazy ... the float must be pretty tight

For a moment, the low ask was .0679 and the high bid was .061, yet the spread was .023 and the mid was .0668

Ha I know they're there ... just what the L2 said on the ticker and the information on the spread/mid didn't add up

they are hiding bids

it's not a billion dollars if you factor in P/E ratio, but 25 cents is still a hell of a stretch

moment of truth

you should email them the idea, it might take ... that would be bigger and more lucrative than the music editing me thinks

It filled my 82000 share buy at the bid when I placed it at the ask ... gay

yep

Oh I can provide the cowbell, cowbell is one thing we don't have to worry about

I gotcha, here's 400

wow, AUTO is on the bid, its a miracle!

It sounds like in the event of a professional CC, there should be a few people with our collective list of questions in case Nolander can't finish the list himself

is anyone watching the l2? it looks to me like the mm's are moving it up themselves

.0066 taken out on 5,000 shares, that's crazy

I believe the price breaking and holding above the upper bollinger band signals a breakout

for the record, my last exam is friday ... most college student I know finish up this week or beginning of next

dude just said it was sold out ...

The unaudited financials and a couple others maybe were released 10 minutes before close

so you don't know the float ...

This is boring ... I'll paint it with my last $20

On the website it says the first 1000 people to post profiles get the live stream for free ... must be expecting a lot of people to buy the pay per view

3 on the bid at .011, great bid support now

nobody cares

DOMS is off the ask, at least for the moment

http://www.cio.com/article/173702/Wal_Mart_Is_Dead_Serious_About_RFID

By Thomas Wailgum
FRI, JANUARY 18, 2008 — CIO — In case the world might have forgotten, Wal-Mart is still very serious about its radio frequency identification (RFID) plans.
MORE ON CIO.COM
How Wal-Mart Lost Its Technology Edge
Report: Hackers to Target RFID in '08
The world's biggest company by revenue ($351 billion) confirmed its commitment to RFID tags in its supply chain in mid-January when RFID Update reported that Sam's Club suppliers could face fines for not attaching RFID tags to its shipments to a Texas distribution center. Suppliers were informed of the possible fines, from $2 to $3 for each non-RFID-tagged pallet, in a Jan. 7, 2008, letter. (Wal-Mart owns Sam's Club.)
The deadline for the suppliers to comply with the RFID mandate is Jan. 31, and it applies only to those Sam's Club suppliers that ship into the DeSoto, Texas, distribution center, RFID Update reported. The significance of the letter cannot be underestimated. "This is believed to be the first time Wal-Mart...has announced specific penalties for suppliers who do not follow RFID tagging guidelines," according to article.

The significance of the amount is also noteworthy. RFID tags, such as the ones suppliers attach to pallets or individual items on pallets, can range from 10 cents to 25 cents, depending on how many tags suppliers purchase from tag makers.
Back in late 2004, when the first RFID mandate for Wal-Mart's top 100 suppliers was about to kick in, CIO published an article on the monumental and largely unsolved problems surrounding Wal-Mart's RFID project. At the time, Simon Langford, Wal-Mart's then manager of RFID strategy, was asked whether there would be monetary penalties for delinquent suppliers, as many industry observers were talking about at the time. Langford would not even speak of such penalties. "We will take each case on merit and discuss it with that supplier," he told CIO.
Apparently, several years' worth of lukewarm results on its RFID initiative, scaled-back expectations and other technology woes may have forced Wal-Mart's hand.
A spokesperson from the Bentonville, Ark.-based behemoth confirmed to RFID Update that "letters were recently sent to some suppliers," but did not provide details or answer questions about requirements, deadlines and fines.
The article reported that the RFID-tagging requirements would extend to other Sam's Club distribution centers in 2008. "The fees for non-tagging are said to start at $2," the article stated, "and escalate based on how long the supplier is out of compliance, capping at $3." In addition, the article stated that a source who had attended a Wal-Mart supplier summit in November 2007 said the retailer "discussed the possibility of allowing suppliers to raise prices to help offset tagging costs," but no allowances had been mentioned in the January requirements letter.