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.
See NITE run. Run NITE, RUN!
NITE's panties in a bunch. Suhweeet!
It's sooo wonderful when you got an MM that realizes that they can't afford to short another share.
And there you go, exactly like I said, NITE has NO shares to sell, and then you see him jump on the BID.... YESSSSS..
SQQQQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEZE.
Everyone remember the game "Keep Away?"
NITE is the monkey in the middle.
So is ABLE. You all know how to play.
VFIN on BID again. Love it!
NITE with all of his fakeness on the ASK.
Smack him and see him run away.
Key NVMG L2 observations for squeezing shorts:
As long as everyone forces NITE to the top of the ASK all by himself, and doesn't join him at the same price or lower, then NITE will be forced to move off the ASK behind everyone, and we will move up.
That, coupled with selling only at the ASK, and jumping in front of NITE and ABLE (who are both short, IMO) on the BID when buying, will get the SQUEEZE into full effect.
Even if you don't want to hit the ASK when buying, always stay in front of NITE and ABLE on the BID. But try to take NITE out on the ASK when he's there all by himself. He usually very quickly move off the ASK if you hit him with low volume, because if he doesn't, he'll be shorting himself a deeper hole, which is good for us too.
Again, I reiterate, it is my strong belief that NITE really doesn't have any *real* shares to sell. Don't let him shake this down just because he looks like he wants to sell, because it's bogus.
I think if we keep the buying pressure on, while being observant of the above, this thing can ride right up to great heights.
Been watching the L2 on NVMG very closely for a long time now. It's the same old story, very predictable at this point.
All IMO, I'm long on NVMG, and I encourage everyone to think for themselves.
Right ON Lowman!
A man who knows how the game is played.
Again, NITE backs off the ASK on low volume.
People, NITE doesn't have shares to sell.
He has shares he needs to cover.
When he jumps to the top of the ASK like that, and he's the only one, there's no reason to follow him, unless you enjoy helping shorts.
He'll back off immediately because he doesn't really want to short any more.
True to form.... we've seen this a million times on NVMG.
Big rewards to those who see the light.
All IMO, long on NVMG. As always, I encourage everyone to think for themselves.
Shorts don't chase runs unless they're really screwed.
Instead, they wait for buying to slow, and then try to drive it back down by scaring shares out of people, and then they buy at the bid. Only under the most runaway buying pressure do they buy at the ask, creating the true short squeeze that we're looking for. So the only way to get that true squeeze is to NEVER dump at the bid, because it's the shorts that are sitting there waiting for your shares.
This was a nice Leg #1 of a breakout. The shorts trying to cover in this lull. Keep the pressure on, and they'll really be screwed. And again, any time you see NITE on the ASK showing 10000 size, it's fake, and they're trying to scare others into selling. Don't fall for it.
MAKE THEM CHASE.
All IMO, long on NVMG. As always, I encourage everyone to think for themselves.
Stop handing your shares to NITE and ABLE on the BID!
If you want to see the squeeze happen, you have to make him pay, not whack him away.
FrankieFingers: IGGY for you.
Now *that* I can agree with.
"Maybe it's better if it doesn't fill to keep the rise slow and steady."
Right on.
Nothing personal Brikk.
I know you're a great guy, and I know you've done well.
Gap-filling rhetoric is, however, not something I take lightly, and usually only comes from people who have a specific agenda to weaken a stocks PPS for their own benefit. It's usually nothing but chartist/TA manipulation, and I will never sit idly by when I see things like that.
I just went through this same crap with INXR, so it's fresh on my mind.
Again, nothing personal.
GAPS = Silly conversation, really. Get real.
Brikk, First you say 90% of traders out there disagree with me when I say that there is that there is nothing scientific whatsoever that supports the idea that all gaps MUST fill.
You say this as if you're an authority on this, and you've taken some kind of poll. Horse-hockey.
On top of that, for some reason you think that I am at no disadvantage for keeping it real. PPPPffffffff.
Furthermore, the traders I know who have been trading *successfully* for many years agree with my stance that nothing supports the notion that gaps must be filled except for unsupported supertitious posts like yours saying that "gaps must fill." It's psychological, justified by rationalization and hindsight when they fill, and when they don't, well, "that's just an anomaly," right?
Allow me to throw out a statistic for you, one that is pretty well verified and documented, unlike your 90% claim above: 85-90% of people who trade lose all their $ and go bust trading. So if you're going to tell me that I'm at a disadvantage because I'm not willing to believe in unsupported superstitious nonsense that 90% of all traders believe, then all I have to say is by not buying into the herd-mentality on that (or any other) front, I think I'm actually *ahead* of the game.
You also say that there are no gaps in HMGP's chart, and say that they're mistakes on stockcharts.com.
Where did I say I use stockcharts.com? I never use them.
I use Quotetracker, with Bigcharts Historical backfill. And by the many ambigious definitions of what gaps really are, I'll pick one definition and I'm showing at least 4-5 gaps on my chart for Hemi, and I know at least 5 other traders/chartists who see what I see on that same chart.
And the bottom line on that is, it doesn't mean squat. Gaps on Hemi, or any other stock chart for that matter, will fill when selling pressure exceeds buying pressure on a grander scale.
Follow the herd, believe what you want. My knickers ain't gonna be in a bunch over a .0005 "gap" on a chart that really represents a continuation of a smooth symmetrical triangle consolidation over several days, and the only thing that makes what you see "a gap" is the fact that the market doesn't trade 24 hours a day.
If you want substantiate why gaps generally fill, you might instead consider the fact that many people put in bids, and don't watch price action like a hawk all day, and therefore they're not willing to increase their bids as price action moves up and away from them. So what you see on the L2 is that some MM's don't provide bid support that currently reflects the real scope of price action, while others buy within the current trading range. When those buyers are done buying, and buying pressure generally subsides, bid support drops away to reveal the highest bid left by those folks who placed their order a long time in the relative past.
In the case of NVMG, there's plenty of bid support at all levels, and has been there for the past 3-4 days, and continues to be maintained. Hence, there really is no gap anyway.
Finally, in the case of NVMG right now, to think that it's a good idea to try to bidwhack just to close a phantom gap, why don't you instead consider that it's BUYING pressure that is going to squeeze the shorts, and selling pressure is only giving MM's a chance to cover. We've been seeing fools helping the MM's cover for the past 3 days with this retarded, impatient behavior of dumping at the bid. How anyone can come to the conclusion that this is the way to help the stock move up--a stock with a known and obviously large short position--is way beyond my comprehension.
Sorry, but I remain unconvinced to such unsupported ill-logic.
And now back to your regularly scheduled herd.
I think the "need" to fill gaps is an A1 bonified total crock of festeringly fresh fly-ridden cowpies.
If it fills, it fills.
You might consider saying the same thing about the 4-5 gaps in Hemi's chart..... then again, you might not.
Always nice to see VFIN on BID
Sweet.
Boneheads letting NITE cover at .011
Sad, but not worried in the slightest.
Great consolidation here.
More hot air than a popcorn maker.
That and a bag of Orville Redenbacher's gourmet will still get you nowhere.
It is your credibility I find completely lacking, and your posting history is far from indicative of a savvy investor, IMO.
Therefore, I will not dignify your comments with even a second more of my time. It is your naivete that I find transparent as glass.
All IMO, I'm long on INXR. GG, don't bother responding.... Your efforts thusfar only further indicates how much time you're willing to waste on your giant 1M position that you say you don't care about. Again, far from savvy.
I can see I'm going to have to turn IGGY's back on.
Kids will play....
The only thing I'm going to say about gaps is have a good look at Hemi's chart, and tell me how much gaps matter. 12/16/2006, 1/31/2007, 2/2/2007, 2/9/2007, etc, etc. And that's just one chart.
Gaps, schmaps, and a bunch of worthless yap.
"See, I told you so."
Pfffffffff.
I yield to TS's explanation.
Nah Bizzyboy... not at all.
Some random blowhards just walked into the room and farted, that's all.
Rebuttal to GG1982
I have a very differing opinion, which I will address point by point (sic) as follows:
#1 about the CEO having excellent credentials, but no evidence thereof. I know at least 20 well-respected and skillful managers who work(ed) at Fortune500 companies, and you'll find absolutely nothing about them on the net. Surprise!
#2 All PR statements followed by the ol' "forward looking" clause for all stocks are what they are, not just INXR. I can come up with probably hundreds of scammy stocks that are not Nevada Corporations. Your point says very little to me.
#3 I'm not investing in an attorney, I'm investing in a technology company. And yes, I call it investing.
#4 "If it sounds too good to be true, it almost always is in the Pinks, caveat emptor" I love that one... one of my favs. How prophetic. My friend, yes, this is the pinks, we all know why we're here, there are no delusions. High-risk, high-reward is the name of the game. Goes with the territory, thanks for your keen insight on that.... NOT. However, in the case of INXR right now, I'd call it low-risk, high-reward. I'll defer to your #6 for an obvious contradiction, whereby you imply that you do such in-depth, meticulous non-public domain research. If you were to be believed, then I would expect that you have done the level of DD that *I* have, so as to be as completely confident in your position as I am in mine, rather than [attempting to] cast doubt over the whole thing repeatedly as you've done.
#5 You say you've laid out [at least] 4 negatives, all of which I find completely irrelevant. In a nutshell, it appears to me to say "I can't find anything about the CEO on the net, therefore he has no good track record, and their PR's are just PR's, and an attorney they used hasn't yet lost an unsubstantiated lawsuit against him, and watch out, this is the pink sheets, and the company doesn't have to do anything." Rhetoric at best. I'm shaking in my shoes now, time to run back to the blue chips with my multibagger $ I guess.
#6 As previously stated, I do not believe that your DD is adequate in any way. After what you've said, I have no reason to believe that you'd spend the kind of time necessary for good DD on a single pink sheet stock, and your comments and posting history reek of a pure MOMO player who jumps from stock to stock. As for your list of potential explanations for such negative posts, you imply that your motives for such negativity cannot be categorized by you being a common basher. IMO, the comments you've made would in no way be beneficial to a person who already had a long position in the stock. So I'd say, either you don't really have a long position in the stock, or you've somehow missed the chapter in Trading 101, titled "Never bash or try to cause FUD on your own stock." Either way, you certainly didn't convince me that you have any kind of genuine, valid, substantiated explanation for the FUD-inducing rhetoric.
Wow... and after reading your whole post, the best part of is the end where you strongly advise people sell on a double. Can a man laugh and yawn at the same time? Well, I really am not convinced why anyone should take your advice, posting history notwithstanding.
GordonGecko, you are quite the comedian. You know better than to believe in PR's. And I know better than to trust random anonymous Johnny-come-lately MOMO players' rhetorical insights on stocks that I've *truly* researched and followed for months. Something tells me I'm not alone on that one.
All IMO, Long on INXR.
I encourage people to think for themselves.
I'll liquidate all my other positions to buy more if I see anything even *remotely close* to .0012.
"One man gathers what another man spills." - Robert Hunter
??? Shakerzzz is not even in this, to the best of my knowledge.
Don't know what you're talking about.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?Message_id=16606287&txt2find=inxr
Good luck on that one. I haven't had much luck trying to swing this so far. Had to buy back in higher the only time I tried.
Won't be trying that again.
New MM on the BID! SPIN
Absolutely WONDERFUL PR.
Great focus, well documented plan.
So much to be excited about.
I'm sure I'll have more comments later.
NVMG BOOM, NITE backed off the ask on less than 100K shares.
What did I tell ya? What a joke.... Just keep it away from NITE on the bid, and don't let NITE on the ask scare ya, and we'll be moving up quite nicely. Anytime you see NITE on the ask by himself with 10K size, it's probably bogus. Give him a little smack, and watch him run. Watch to see if he tries shorting more as well.
All IMO, Long on NVMG
NITE Covering some shorts NVMG here, bigtime, IMO
Boxing it in, covering all retail shares they can shake out of their own clients.
Gotta love it. Picked up 300K more shares at .011 this morning. Let's rock!
Remember guys, NITE with 10K blocks on the ask is FAKE selling pressure. If you hit him even slightly, he'll back off the ask, since he really doesn't have real shares to sell.
Want to see this sucker really squeeze? Keep the shares away from NITE on the bid. Don't let him cover.
Also, I think ABLE is short too, from what I saw yesterday on L2, and today as well.
All IMO, Long on NVMG.
That is definitely short covering, IMO.
NITE immediately moves the ASK up when you smack him, lowers his size, and then jumps at the top of the bid with a giant bid size.
He doesn't seem to really want to sell any shares, in spite of how he tries to make it look.
Yep..... and again, as I type this, you tap him for 5000 shares on the ask, and he backs it up more. He doesn't want to sell, he wants to scare you into selling. Don't fall for those games.
All IMO, Long on NVMG.
Welp, it looks like NITE is the one that needs to cover shorts to me. He's got it boxed in and is trying to shake some shares to cover, IMO. Wouldn't be wise to make it easy for him right now.
You're not the only one.
now WHAT is that??? 54M shares printing 1 tick below the BID at .001 inside of 1 minute?
This is by far the wackiest L2 I've ever seen.
Oh, and then BRGE moves up to .0011. That must have been BRGE playing that game, IMO.
The nature of that game I don't yet understand.
He bought that stock without doing any of his magical DD too...
Or did he?
Even better, Mr. Smartypants buys shares of stocks without doing DD first, jumping from stock to stock.
Oh yeah, where's the PROOF that he bought anything?
Nevermind.
Credibility... yes..... hmmmmmm, so elusive.
Yet another high-brow winner comes along with all 3 of his membermarks and weak-ass year-long stock-hopping FUD-inducing bash-posting tell-all history to save us all.
Credibility.... what a double-edged sword it is.
I love it.
<YAWN>
The value of that poster's comments here shouldn't even warrant as many hyphens as I've so generously doled out.
"Mods should be moderating"
Yeah exactly, and as moderator, Tradeswapper has my full support, specifically because of his keenness in identifying specific critical topics that require moderation, and willingness to act in the face of patently irresponsible and potentially illegal collusive opposition.
Yes, I agree. This should be a forum for the stock. And so it is.
I welcome the high-brow intentions (from everyone, not just the moderator) to keep things sane and useful in vast sea of worthless chaotic boards run by clueless moderators. To that end, while I will always maintain my right to re-evaluate the following statement, I have no contention with the actions of our moderator to date.
All IMO, Long on INXR.
Excellent post. Bollies redux.
I believe I've sufficiently made my point on this topic here before.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=16708961
As I alluded to at the bottom of my previous post, on an INXR chart from time to time, I throw up (10,2) bollies on my chart.
What do I really use them for? To gauge how others might react to seeing them, and for no other reason of my own.
As stocktraderz said, "they do not really predict PPS." I consider this an understatement.
I'd like to quote from a great book by Dr. Alexander Elder called "Come into My Trading Room," Copyright 2002, published by John Wiley & Sons, Page 95. If anyone here doesn't know who Dr. Elder is, I encourage them to find out, and it shouldn't be too difficult. As quoted: "How can you tell when a market has reached an undervalued or overvalued level, a zone for buying or selling? Market technicians can use channels to find those levels. A channel, or an envelope, consists of two lines, one above and one below a moving average. There are two main types of channels: straight envelopes and standard deviation channels, also known as Bollinger Bands."
"In Bollinger bands, the spread between the upper and lower lines keeps changing in response to volatility. When volatility rises, Bollinger bands spread wide, but when markets become sleepy, those bands start squeezing the moving average. This feature makes them useful for options traders, since volatility drives options prices. In a nutshell, when Bollinger bands become narrow, volatility is low, and options should be bought. When they swing far apart, volatility is high, options should be sold or written."
And finally, right there at the start of the very next paragraph written by the esteemed and highly regarded Dr. Elder, for all of the uninitated, and in stark opposition to all of the T/A spinners out there that may or may not have already dared to leave their footprints here, are the following words, and I quote:
"Traders of stocks and futures are better off with straight channels or envelopes."
It would appear that several folks here didn't seem to get that point out of my previous post, or chose to patently ignore it because it ran in stark opposition to their agenda. To others here who truly want to learn, I suggest you read the above quoted line again (or perhaps the whole book for that matter), and consider the years of experience Dr. Elder has in the field of technical analysis over the persistent rantings of anonymous posters (not unlike myself) on a message board. In other words, don't take my word for it.... After all, I just read some books, and you all don't know me from Adam. To avoid being most redundant on this topic, I'll just say that at the bottom of page 167 in Dr. Elder's book is yet another reiteration of his previous statements on the usefulness and intent of Bollinger bands.
In the case of INXR, I take further issue with Dr. Elder's statement: "Traders of stocks and futures are better off with straight channels or envelopes."
"Better off" implies that there still might be some value to be derived from their use. Since most stocks are not stocks that move in 10%-200%+ daily increments like .000x stocks coming off a long-standing bottom, it is my contention that Bollinger bands have even less value on INXR than Dr. Elder's implications.
Silence before the storm? Setting up for a run? Looks that way to me. It certainly doesn't take a barely useful and oft-misused and misinterpreted T/A indicator to convince me of that. There are many other places one should be looking for such evidence, and most of that can be plainly seen, if one's kept their eyes open and avoided clouding their vision with emotion and baseless T/A.
In conclusion, I leave you all with these two thoughts.
Traders who make good use of technical analysis don't continually search for flavor of the day indicators to support their decisions based on what they would like to see in price action.
And my latest favorite quote of my own:
Beware the agenda of the popular chartist.
All IMO, Long on INXR.
That is some funny $heet.
And here all this time I thought I was the only one doing that.
Whoooop, I guess that means penny_ta wants in. LOL
I love it when chartists come out of nowhere and publicly predict consolidation, lower PPS, stability, etc.....
In my experience it usually means "Hey guys! Wait for me!"
As I always like to say:
Beware the agenda of the popular chartist.
;-D
We already have a different set of investors here, as represented by the recent addition of primarily OTCBB-based MM's backed by what appears to me to be some heavy hitters.
In case you haven't noticed... Not to mention the fact that I think we have a higher-quality group of folks here on this board than I'm used to seeing on so many other boards.
In spite of what many may think, IMO, uplisting to OTCBB is not the only way to achieve a well supported PPS, and I know I don't have to list out a hundred different symbols right now to prove that. Metaphorically speaking, sure, uplisting would be icing on the cake. I'm going to choose to look for continuing assurance that the cake tastes great without it. And on that note, I think we're well on our way.
Think about how many issues get news every week, and how after a while, the PR's cease to have an effect as people, as their eyes glaze over.... and actually start to have a negative effect on PPS as flippers buy every X-day and sell every Y-day because Y-days are news days....
Hopefully we'll get a PR ONLY when significant events take place, or to document significant progress and forward-looking events.... and not a moment sooner. The last thing I want to see is a company that adheres to a few impatient traders' ideas of a news frequency quota, because frankly, that would cause a loss of credibility for me.
If you have a long position on INXR for any other reason than to be a ground floor investor of a rapidly developing software development/service provisioner company with a high-potential product offering, and are unwilling to be patient enough to hold for a much greater PPS resulting from a well-founded monster run while the story develops, then I can assure you that you'll be plenty disappointed, with or without a weekly news story.
I recognize that some may still wish for news ASAP. If we get some good news soon, I won't complain.... of course. However, I maintain just as much enthusiasm at the opportunity to continue accumulating at the expense of the folks who can't even sit still long enough to watch Short Attention Span Theater.
Oh, and on OTCBB stocks, MM's might play different games, but certainly *not* fewer games. Also keep in mind that when you see MM's playing games as hard as they have been on INXR, that it might actually be a *good* sign.... a sign that MM's are very interested. That's the way I'm choosing to see it, anyway.
Long on INXR.
"I HATE Fridays"
Hate is a powerful emotion.
Emotions have no place in trading.
It's that simple.
Worrying about price action from tick to tick on a stock like this is quite a waste of energy, not to mention the ultimate distraction.
I look at the big picture, and I see fields of green.
To each his own.