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.
Short borrow fee rates now at 7.08
"Little production" why? If the implication is because the tech doesn't work, then we can agree to disagree. If it's because there's not been a steady supply of PLs and they've had a hard time acquiring the electronics for production of new EC units, to name just two previously represented and disclosed problems, then we can agree.
I'm not following how the Series A is a fiasco. I personally think they should not exist (be canceled), but what decisions made through wielding the Series A voting rights have harmed NSI sharehodlers? What decisions, if you could have voted common shares, would you have done differently? Until you articulate particular decisions, I don't think you have the facts to support calling their continued existence a "fiasco."
Very astute, but taken in context with your concession that the company is not a scam, I'd have to imagine that Management would not have taken such "a big bet" if they did not have a good faith basis in proprietary numbers underlying the technology. Say what you will, but to think otherwise necessarily implies there is no business judgment defense for the purchase.
There are lots of barriers to entry for disruptive business models that make it hard to compete (generally) let alone when perfect storm of market forces (micro and macro, stock manipulation and sheer bad luck) align against you (specifically).
But who sold? From my count there's at least 30 million borrowed shares out.
The S-1 and a R/S should be built into the current PPS. However, I think we see sub $.01 with short pressure.
So you've explained who bought at .022, but who dumped the PPS to .022?
9 days later?
Who do you think is dumping 3 million shares between 2:15 and 3 p.m. on a Friday with no real news developments over the last week? Are those your market makers? Or are they manipulators?
Short borrow fee rates more than doubled today. Up to 4.63 from 2.19
"Where was SHMP’s 30-day notice to YOTA?"
If you're implying one wasn't sent, you have no way (and are not entitled to) that information. Pure speculation.
"What’s your point? SHMP is lying?"
You know I don't draw conclusions, I just say what is. In this case, what is: we don't have a counter party perspective. Would be nice to know it.
Still no 8K from YOTA....
On this we agree.
The Notice itself need not be disclosed, but does the sending of a notice have to be disclosed? Is that 8K worthy?
It's a liquidated damages provision and a lawsuit would only be needed to enforce the terms if YOTA contests the allegation or declines to honor the terms... we can only speculate because YOTA hasn't even filed its own 8K. It would be of interest to note that on 7/24, just two days before the termination, YOTA extended and tendered $120k to the Trust.
I won't draw conclusions like some, but it's certainly something to think about and pay attention to.
"the Company’s termination of the Merger Agreement pursuant to Section 10.2(b) thereof based on breaches by Yotta of certain representations in the Merger Agreement"
The Merger Agreement:
"The Merger Agreement may be terminated under certain customary and limited circumstances at any time prior to the Closing, including, without limitation:(vii) by the Company, subject to certain exceptions, if Yotta or Merger Sub has breached any of its representations, warranties, covenants, or agreements in the Merger Agreement and such breach cannot be cured at all or within the earlier of (A) 30 days after written notice thereof and (B) the Outside Termination Date."
NSI statement is above... Where's NSI's $3 mil? If NSI is not getting $3 mil from YOTA, then the breach was curable, yes? no? Hmmmm
Like I said.. haven't read the Nevada SOS filings.
You obviously haven't read the Nevada Secretary of State filings or 28 USC 1408. The determining factor is not just where the assets are located.
It's a Nevada corporation... The jurisdiction is stated at the top of every SEC filing... Wow.
Generalizations, conclusions, stereotypes and underhanded ad hominem attacks. Great class.
You clearly don't know what Rule 144 actually says re: "control shares" since I quoted from it in my last post and you didn't even realize. IMO. until the Series A are canceled, common shares are not "control securities." Moreover, lock up provisions are not required by law, but are contractual in nature to prevent selling pressure. Literally nothing to do with a black line 5% ownership.
It's obvious when one just regurgitates what they've been told without learning on their own. Toxic financiers don't want to own more than 5% in the event a 13G is required to be filed because they don't want to be on record in that manner. Moreover, filing a 13G in circumstances where common ownership may result in control over management, 5% can be a meaningful thresehold. It's a case-by-case matter. Therefore, to avoid having to stringently review each case, it's a general preference, but not a rule.
Now that's a class I'll take... Deflection 101.
It's embarassing that you're so actively looking for praise on the SHMP Ihub message board. I never said the SPAC deal would, or for that matter, wouldn't happen. I talk in "ifs," not "whens."
Concerning a "control shareholder," the term has a legal meaning. It carries with it the legal implication that by ownership of stock, one has the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of a person. As long as the Series A are uncancelled, Fife / GHS has NO SUCH POWER. You can take your know-it-allism and go sit in the corner.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
The Re-IPO process contemplates what you're referring to. "We are currently in negotiations with another entity which will involve a Re-IPO and a new Capital raise of between $10-$12M."
There are exemptions applicable to reporting certain % of stock ownership in OTC companies, so it's utterly irrelevant in this situation. Only matters if they get to vote. Seriously, stop with the class stuff... it's classless.
There's no viable business reason to increase the A/S. Not when they've already filed for a 1:25 R/S. I always take the situation at face value, but if I was a betting man, I'd bet that NSI just amends the previously filed R/S to... let's say 1:100.
That's because I'm in the class above you. So long as the Series A remain uncancelled, GHS / Fife will never be a "control shareholder" regardless how many common shares held.
You forget about the Series A....
Borrowing 10 million shares in a 3 cent OTC company with daily average 2 million volume is not "normal everyday market making activity"
So we'll generalize "a 3 cent stock" and not discuss the specifics around THIS 3 cent stock? What about GHS who wants to buy at 80% the ten day average? Why wouldn't they want to drive the price down as low as possible, buy their 340+ mil shares and than let the price go back up as they periodically sell? Seems like a good reason to short THIS 3 cent stock.
Now, let's think... that's IF GHS sells. As of the effective date of the S-1, GHS will have the option to own, for 80% of the lowest price over the most recent ten day average, 1/3 of NSI. That's on top of any other shares that GHS currently holds. Perhaps FIFE likes the Shrimp and just wants cheap shares so he comes out a large majority shareholder in the NewCo.
depends on the juice.
nope.
"So they have a duty to not allow a company to go up 5% based on $10,000 in buying, especially in a stock like SHMP." You're describing a Market Manipulator.
That's right. 5x avg. volume.
FINRA reporting more than 10 mil shares borrowed since 07/21
Tell that to FINRA reporting.
New Short interest opened on yesterday's S-1.
"Shares to be outstanding after the offering 1,193,479,064"
Assuming a PPS (post dilution) of $.033, the sales by GHS will bring in approx. $10,714,285.70.
Should reduce 1:1 principal amounts owed to GHS and therefore, the accrual of monthly interest.
Appears SHMP shareholders are being used to protect the YOTA Trust; being used to pay down GHS's debt before consummation of the merger, IMO
YOTA hasn't traded 1 share since July 6, 2023?
Massive buys yesterday with only 6% short interest on 3+ mil volume. Doesn't look like shorts covering. Interesting.
"massive sales"? I wonder how one would characterize the counterparty.... "massive buys"?
My mismemory of dates doesn't change my reasoning, but thanks for correcting me. Honestly, I didn't think it was 2020 because I thought that was when the last fire occurred and I didn't take the time to look it up to confirm dates. It's no excuse, but I was going fast and it's definitely hard to keep track of time when there's been more than one fire.