Primarily big board stocks, long positions. Playing with some penny stocks to keep things fun.
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.
Look at all those .0001's just sitting and waiting for "that" group to continue accumulating! Bargain basement prices! Once in a lifetime...uhhhh....year.....day....hell you can pick this crap up at this price forever...at least until it dies for good sometime this year.
In on again off again IRO/Cheerleader certainly does.
It just never gets old reading the most recent Wyoming filing declaring 10 Billion common shares.
https://wyobiz.wy.gov/Business/FilingDetails.aspx?FilingNum=2010-000585143
Another session where IDCN traded exactly where is should.
To Da Moon!
Looking good today. SCG must be accumulating for the next run.
To Da Moon!
That is exactly what I am saying. And no, I can not prove this anymore that you can prove the opposite.
That is a good point that I had forgotten about, though it falls in my speculation folder as CCME is not named nor have I read the report nor do we have an absolutely clear picture of CCME and it's parent entity relationship. The report could exist and could be on CCME and there still be fraud.
It I thought there was zero chance of vindication I would sell at these low prices and take my pocket change. I still give it a 1% chance. Make it 2% with this report.
I am typically positive on ANX but I have to disagree. After the rejection a high volume day was due to ppl closing their positions and day traders and short sellers playing. Volume will dry up and the price will slowly fall like it has on every other negative event. Yes, as of right now their market cap is less than their cash on hand. But they have a new unexpected problem-they have no revenue stream and no hopes for one in the next 12+ months. (Even that is optimistic for 514. 530 and 188 are now much further off). They do not have 12 months of cash. I am sure they were counting on 530 keeping the lights on. I see two things happening:
1) They must raise capital and soon. Can't wait until the last minute. This means new shares-it's the only thing they have unless they sell 188 or other intellectual property-which would really hurt share prices. Either way, dilution or a negative hit.
2) Once below a $1 they will get a delisting warning. They cannot risk delisting and be taken seriously. A second reverse split is likely if they cannot sustain over $1.
Just my opinion but I personally am looking for an entry around $.50-.60. I won't touch it above that. Even then I feel a RS announcement will drop is to .30 in one session.
Unless the acquire something there is now no revenue potential (aka no reason the stock would go up) for at least a year. Sure an FDA acceptance for filing of 514 NDA would be a short lived pop.
The one wildcard that actually is more likely now is to try to find a buyer for ANX that it better funded. So anything is possible, but this went from an investment in a biopharm with a bright outlook to a pure high risk spec play.
Ping and the GH work merely reinforced others. I always thought of her as a junior analyst cutting her teeth on CCME and if right would have been great for her. But let's face it GH isn't exactly a top tier analyst.
The bus count is critical if, and only if, it turns out that the ads are being paid for and it isn't some sham. If legit than yes, I am loving the bus count even at a -1300, which is statistically insignificant.
Too many "if"s remain though. Until answers come out we will drift lower. Maybe sub penny before the court case.
Now very much compared to many other stocks. And what's up? Two days ago you were telling me how ANX sucked and everyone knew it and it was so obvious. Now you are pro ANX through their short lived bounce?
Starr could have simply accepted the word of the paid off auditor and been lazy - though not sure how Dorothy fits in though.
or
Starr could have masterminded the entire thing and as has been suggested shorted through some untraceable third entity that they control.
Again, who knows the truth. Would make for a good book though.
Well, lets see what happens after our day in court (or rather Starr's). At this point the best I am hoping for is some clarity on what transpired. Not hopeful we will even get that...but I do still hold my position and see little value in parting with it for less than $5-6.
I'm with you in the stupid category on this one. I did sell at 21...then after the first hit piece saw the buy of a lifetime at a much lower price...ya, not so much.
I do not care to speculate who is responsible. There are a wide range of possibilities I have read from an organized group of high level shorts including a couple well known media guys to a money laundering front for the Chinese mob. I am hoping we eventually find out.
To pull this off though, what would you need? A shell company - the CEO could have been provided that, or already purchased it and then approached by the responsible parties. A bank and a local Chinese arm of a global accounting firm in your pocket? Those can be had in the U.S. for the right price - I am guessing that price is far lower in China. A corrupt of purchased regional Chinese official to grant them the exclusive contract. Heck, we have prostitute dealing governor's here, so I am not thinking that is hard to find over there. A bunch of small LCD screens with the ability to play content from hard drives? I can build you one from used parts of a laptop and cheap desktop LCD for a couple hundred bucks - we KNOW the Chinese can do it far cheaper. Rip some ads from somewhere, slap the whole deal in a bunch of buses. Now the groundwork is complete... To get the money flowing you simply need a couple trusted people to get the word out - act like they have inside information, really know what is going on - aka con artists. These guys would need to have a solid understanding of stocks, warrants, market manipulation - basically about 2/3 of the people that post on this forum. Get them to post on a couple forums - or even one guy posting as several people on several forums. This is a page straight from the pink sheet pushers. At that point we all know how the market works - 98% emotion/2% fact - mob mentality kicks in, other people want to seem like "experts" so they chime in supporting the original con man and it snowballs. Enter the shorts that either funded it, planned it or found out about it as a completely outside entity and we know where things end up. As far as Starr...we know what they had the right to do, but do we really know if they exercised those rights? Who knows.
Please do not misunderstand this post. I am not saying this is what DID happen - just saying that in retrospect it really would not be difficult to pull off. It would even be entirely possible to do without the CEO knowing what was going on depending on how hands on he is. Some U.S. CEO's of small companies never even step foot in the office and designate a President to do it. Anything is possible. Of course, I do admit that there is a chance - a small one - that CCME is everything it claimed to be.
As much as you love your history allow me to update you on current events. Jeff has earned his money pissing on you (as a stockholder) and as of today 100K shares traded at $0.0000 - so ya, he has to give it away now. So a decade+ of fake PR's on fake business has resulted in the one and only place it could have.
Salty -
Actually I firmly believe I will win PowerBall. Of course, that means I need to go buy a ticket.
Seriously though...CCME would have to accomplish a great deal to trade above $1-$2 again. My belief is that the company has no intention of taking those steps. If a company truly wanted to vindicate itself there is no logical, sane reason to have been so lackadaisical and elusive for the last 6 months. If the goal was really to prove they were innocent and get back on the right track you would see the CEO giving passionate investor relations type speeches, some form of PR's, something. This whole "they cannot talk during the audit" just doesn't fly. And let's not forget the last bastion of hope - that all encompassing, absolutely happening, directly funded by the company, going to prove everything Piper/PRC engagement. How's that progressing? As I stated months ago - I do not believe it ever was...but hey, maybe they will release a statement after hours today and I will look foolish. That would be absolutely spectacular and fine by me. I am now firmly in the camp that many of the shorts started in - this is a fraud, always has been, always will be - not trying to prove themselves because there is nothing to prove. Slapped some monitors in some buses and rented an office to give the illusion of legitimacy to what was nothing more than a scam to make a handful of people a great deal of money.
I still love the collection of PM's I have starting that people have talked to the CEO or know for a fact that Piper is on site doing this or that...sorry, I have to run, Eric Schmidt needs my advice on who to acquire next.
In general technical terms is there is a large gap on a normally trading stock than one would expect a partial or full retrace to fill that gap. CCME is anything but a normally trading stock and I see no reason in the world it would do this.
Could it be an $11/share stock? Yes. But so much would have to happen I give it the same chances as me waking up tomorrow with $220M as a PowerBall winner.
hehe....no, my simple post was because I didnt get where you were going with your half finished post that you have since completed. I really didnt get what you were saying in that one - but the longer one is much clearer.
I am not going to say who I asked but funny enough, Frankie was not one of them. His intentions were fairly clear from when I first showed up. Even funnier is reading his history here he went through similar cycles as me - bought in to it, questioned it, realized what it was, slammed it but then he came around to just make peace and play it. I am skipping that stage.
I am sure many have posted over the last 10 years after getting burned in one fraud or another with IDCN. Dont worry, I'll get bored as well as I am sure Peter and others will - no one will be left to post reality checks - Ken and Jeff will start pumping again and it will go through another cycle. That is what everyone is counting on.
But no, no anger towards Frankie. Sometimes it is fun to get him going though by posting "To the Moon" - which ironically gets deleted every time I post it. But I know why that is...a particular assistant mod deletes most of my posts...as I am sure this one will be for mentioning that fact.
No...if you go back a year or so in my posts you will see that I sold out a LONG time ago in the .0008 range on average. I do not hold a single share nor really any anger except toward Jeff and Ken.
So to answer your next question (Why do I even post here) it is simple. When I first bought into IDCN I asked several people - most still post here often - if this was a typical pink sheet or if there were real revenues and business ventures. Every one of them swore that it was real and that it was verified and that there was actual revenue streams (including several who now slam it at every turn and swear it has been a P&D pinkie all along). In other words, some of the most prolific posters here outright lied.
OK, there is a shocker. Pink sheet players that lie? Who would have thought? Yep, I trusted them - guess I got spoiled by the quality of the people and their integrity on the big board stocks. I forgot I was now playing in the "hood" of the trading world. I did sustain a loss - nothing big thankfully.
So now I stop by every now and then to essentially call bullshit when the lies get going again. It takes very little time and hopefully someone along the way has read a post of mine and skipped an IDCN play and avoided a loss.
I do not in any way blame Frankie. He has finally come around to admitting what he is - a pink sheet player. Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Some people make some nice coin doing it. He knows IDCN is a fraud, but he also knows that sometimes people can make it run up a bit and he can cash in. That doesn't mean I need to help him nor does it change why I post.
Bottom line is if you read my posts, Peter's and a couple others and STILL want to go long in IDCN, you deserve what you get.
You are in at .0001 and hope to get out at .0002 - and may very well do so. With the additional shares out there and the fewer lines of crap Jeff is getting people to buy it is more difficult than in past years, but that doesn't mean the right line of crap won't be picked up by the right penny pumper and you get lucky.
I do follow the people you listed, Adam F. and a dozen others and am well aware that for everyone that was pro-ANX there was an anti-ANX person. You should be honest with yourself as well and admit that most of these folks make their money recommending/promoting stocks and always take a position very pro or very against - and then take the ones they are right about and highlight those on their web sites. I have seen each of these wrong just as many times as they are right so I do my own research. You can read my posts on this board well over 2 years back. 530 actually had a high probability of being accepted due to be a reformulation of a pre-existing drug using their proprietary emulsion process to reduce site specific reactions. In fact even the people you list did not generally say the drug was going to be rejected, they claims that it had very little revenue potential (which I full agree with) and therefore the stock was overpriced (which I also agree with based purely on math - but what stock trades on math alone?). I do take exception with "Most are spot on 75% of the time" - no, they are not. They may claim to be but no one is ever spot on in the market 3 out of 4 times. This isn't my first rodeo....
ANX is likely not finished. This is just the next in a chain of very amateur type mistakes. They are spending millions on contractors (based on their business model of minimal staff and contract experts as needed). This makes it even more puzzling how such mistakes could occur. 530 was never about huge revenue streams - more just a "get something out the gate" type drug that would have funded the extended trials for 514/188. At this point there will most likely be another round of fundraising (dilution) to get through those trials. There really isn't another way as existing cash on hand versus burn rate will not carry them unless they get incredibly lucky on NDA acceptance, fast tracked and accepted on 514. I am betting against that based on current track record.
Its a tough call. They will appeal the current rejection, and they will lose (no one wins - that would require the FDA admitting it make a judgement error). So 530 is now years off.
In my opinion 514 is their best last hope. They get it though they will knock it out of the park - any hiccups and it's over. This just went from a close to sure thing to a highly risky spec play overnight. I closed all my long position between 7:01-7:15 last night and was lucky enough to just scrape off a few dollars profit. I feel for those of you who lost, but if you are still long (depending on your cost basis) I would look to sell on any bounce or plan to hold for 12-18 more months and hope that the coming dilution is not too bad and potential of another reverse split to avoid delisting does not happen.
At this point I cannot help but wonder if intentional fraud by the officers is a possibility. I find it hard to believe that people that claim to be so experienced can screw up so blatantly.
Gene,
With all due respect I am anything but a CCME supporter at this point. That said, throwing a Greenberg led AIG, rating agencies, STARR, Enron, Subprime mortgages, Worldcom, Madoff and CCME into the same example does not make sense on any level. While each of those have failed they have been for very different reasons - some nefarious, some completely the opposite. And yes, in some cases the "facts" themselves were so blown out of proportion and distorted that it led to the fall of an organization.
Hey buddy - I am right there with you on the "hating CCME" train, but maybe we can at least stay coherent?
This has happened once in like a year on a freak thing where some fool bought at .0002...only to return to no big with PLENTY on the ASK of 0.0001. That is not a pattern in any sense of the word.
That sounds suspiciously like a CEO that is either (A) Creating enough shares and awarding enough to himself to always maintain at least 1 share over 50% (aka, majority) and/or (B) Creating enough shares so that no single shareholder has over a 10% stake and thereby cannot force certain events.
But since we all know JRB is an above board kind of kind, that would never happen, right?
That is odd since LII not showing any bids and is showing NITE on the ASK of .0001 with a placeholder order (no idea how many shares really behind it).
If you so firmly believe that, why not make a killing of a lifetime and pick up a couple hundred million shares dirt cheap now?
I have to agree somewhat. FDA approval is NEVER 100%, but the ONLY risk here is that the FDA does not fee that there is a significant enough difference in site specific irritation reduction from the original drug, as I understand it. This is as close to a sure thing as it gets in this sector.
Lets not forget - the last run was ignited by PSC - the largest P&D group to ever exist. Now gone.
I will be happy to get the truth - if we do get the truth - once and for all. It would also be a nice side benefit if they are found to have some measure of real business and this goes up.
Trial set in fight over China MediaExpress records
By RANDALL CHASE, AP Business Writer – 16 hours ago
WILMINGTON, Del. (AP) — A Delaware judge on Wednesday refused to dismiss a lawsuit that seeks to force China MediaExpress Holdings to turn over company records that Starr International believes will show evidence of mismanagement and wrongdoing.
The suit was filed by a unit of Starr International, which is run by former American International Group Inc. chairman Hank Greenberg.
Following a hearing, Vice Chancellor Donald Parsons said he would hold a trial in late November to decide whether the Chinese company, which places TV advertising on intercity and airport express buses in China, should be forced to open up its books to Starr Investments Cayman II.
Starr filed a separate lawsuit against China MediaExpress in March in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, alleging that the company misrepresented its financial performance in order to attract investors. The suit claims that shares for which Starr paid $13.5 million in October 2010 are now basically worthless.
Attorneys for China MediaExpress, or CCME, argued that Starr was improperly seeking its records in the Chancery Court lawsuit in order to circumvent a stay on discovery in the federal lawsuit. The stay was issued pending a ruling on CCME's motion to dismiss that case.
But Parsons agreed with Starr attorney Andre Bouchard that the issue of whether Starr was using the state lawsuit as an end-run around the federal court stay on exchanging information was one to be decided at trial, not on a motion to dismiss.
China MediaExpress was delisted by NASDAQ in May after analysts began questioning its financial results. Its outside auditing firm resigned in March, saying it had "lost confidence" in the representations of management, and in the commitment of the company's board and audit committee to good governance and reliable financial reporting.
CCME, led by chairman and CEO Zheng Cheng, also has seen the resignations of its chief financial officer, the chairman of its audit committee, and a board member who was a representative of Starr.
Albert Manwaring IV, an attorney for China MediaExpress, argued Wednesday that the issues in the state and federal lawsuits are virtually identical.
Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
___________________________________________________________________
So we are looking at late November before we hear anything? This will be under a dime by then, easily.
Yes, I am aware that the Thunder Bay area has significant gold exploration. The area also has it's own web site, thunderbaybusiness.ca. This is a well established site with many, many news articles over the years regarding the area and the gold prospecting business in it. Interesting thing though...do a Google search on:
IDCN site:thunderbaybusiness.ca
Zero hits.
Hockey Stick site:thunderbaybusiness.ca
Three hits - nothing to do with "Hockey Stick".
I am also aware that I posted that I was doing DD on gold mining. That was when Ken posted that IDCN was in fact mining, processing, selling gold from Hockey Stick and I was trying to confirm that his various descriptions were even feasible. They were not.
Bottom line is that I had actually contacted a couple organizations in Thunder Bay - and none of them ever heard of Jeff or IDCN. Interesting note, none of them ever heard of a mine or area named Hockey Stick either. Sure there is a pretty little map on the IDCN site, but anyone can use Microsoft Paint to create that. I am not saying it doesn't exist (anyone having taken logic classes knows the difficulties in proving a negative) I am simply saying that if HS exists, it is doing a damn fine job of avoiding being found by Google.
That sounds great! I'm not real good with the whole web search thing though, can you help me out? I am trying to find a reference to Hockey Stick to get more information on it OTHER than from the IDCN site (or another blog just repeating stuff from the IDCN site). Since you found out there is a lot going on, can you post a link to get me started?
Thanks!
Exactly. First spend a couple months saying you are working Hockey Stick like mad and making money - then a year later say "Ya, we looked at it...and passed" Then make some wild unsubstantiated claim that you are working with yet another anonymous company at an anonymous location to enter into an undisclosed deal whereby you have an unknown interest and hope it is enough to fool some new people in to buying your recently dumped multi-billion share dilution.
To Da Moon!
With a couple horrible days in the overall market it is difficult to determine a trend in ANX...nothing seems to be immune to the idiocy of Washington politics these days. That said, we are very close to an FDA decision - one way or the other, it is time to place your bets. If you are going long, these are some very good entry points.
Today is The Day! I feel it! IDCN will actually sell a share today! You just have to click your heels together three times and believe!
To Da Moon!
PS - With gold prices SKY HIGH right now I can not help but wonder about this fine example of an official post from the (at the time) official Investor Relations Officer:
Interesting question. Another interesting one is can you declare the loss if it is in a retirement account - like an IRA - where you normally could not declare any loss.
Joe - you tend to have a good handle on things, so you may very well be right. Thing is, since the lack of TA induced almost-halt, there has not been enough volume to support this hypothesis. I agree that it may bounce at some point - but your statement could be interpreted as calling CCME a fraud and a vehicle simply for stock manipulation. Not saying that is how you meant it, but if it is accurate then it in where it belongs - on the Pink Sheets.
There was an interesting post I read some time ago that I never saw a follow-up too. Someone asked if CCME is found to be a fraud can the write off be made as a "theft". It is interesting since if you are a victim of a scam you can often write off your loss in such a manner. Just never heard of it being done with a stock investment and what the qualifications would be. Anyone have any thoughts?