From Nitwits posts you can see its a spectator sport as well.

Id say its the nature of getting screwed.

That is... Always look for carpet burns and excesive team spirit...

Id say its akin to looking up on facebook the cheerleading captain you took on a date to Beauty and the Beast in 10th grade only to discover she was sevicing the football team regularly after practice to boost team spirit... And for those offended by this analogy just reverse teams... It is the failings of human nature, as was the ingredients for the rest of this drama.

This is the same logic that got us here in the first place.

Ping was given the statements by the company.

New to this sector and interested in MMT.v but i havent invested in something that is not on the main exchanges. w

hich exchange is this on - a canadian one?

how do you follow it... i cannot find it on marketwatch?

what hours does it's exchange operate - perhaps there is just a delay with yahoo.

how about we have him dance tommy gun style.

I dont believe this is the case - this is the spirit of self-justifying speculation that drew us here, disregarding many red flags as short conspiracy and injecting gallons hope and faith into an information vacuum. I doubt they have a significant relationship. Rick stated he learned information from many people in the investment community in China. He has no reason to lie about this that I can see.

i believe you are off base. Rick is a distant acquaintence of Carson - I doubt more. Several of the short writers have written him angry emails due to his criticism of some short arguments. I would take him at face value - he heard multiple concerns stated 'on the street' in China by other firms that had intended to vet CCME and came up unsatisfactory. there is nothing particularly complex, suspicious, or insidious about this position.

This is not coming on-line on the Nasdaq again. What does this do to the unsettled options and shorts that need covering? There are no more shares to trade I assume - at least no ones in this 'regulated' market. Can you cover a short and satisfy options obligations through a stock listed on the pink sheets?

Sadder still - it took the 8K for us to see a reasonable truth.

Perhaps chinese legal consequences would be best for him.

wow. impressive. far exceeds my expectations...

i seconding the plug for Rick again...

i wont repeat myself, but he has been very helpful to me...

anyone that was in the lynching party - i recommend you rectify your guilty conscience, if i may be so presumptuous

One might bother if 2's and 4's are your lucky numbers...

Re #3: The buyback has always been an if... I would rather just encourage them to act on that original intention rather than further expand it. I anticipate the company needs to retain more capital now (assuming it has any) as my guess is that these events will damage their business in China.

Re #4: A clear statement of cash reserves would be adequate - perhaps in a separate communication - again to acknowledge that the business may have some headwinds now and thus needs cash reserves.

in talking with Ping several times I have been left with the impression that the likelihood of her lying or misrepresenting facts... however, i have been left with the impression that she is not particularly versed in how to identify fraud...

This board consistently over-reads and over-determines facts and events.... The overwhelming probability is that MW knows no more than anyone else in his community but has good reason to have grave doubts based on common opinion in china - more than likely he is trying to create facts and numbers to press that same opinion here. Speculating about his real knowledge and intention creates an absolute bias that supports ones own beliefs and helps to ignore counterfactual information. His comments were ambiguous and should be accepted as such... More than likely he has been operating from some degree of belief in his position that is probably reasonanly founded as has Citron given what he relayed to Glen some time ago in his adolescent bet with regards to the near future of the CCME share price

these are the best investment tips ive seen all week.

my apologies... i thought you were pointing out that 'lot of good that does us now' or something along those lines...

facts are still puzzling, i have to admit... perhaps there are a few more twists to anticipate...

I can do without the sarcasm.

Anyway i can pick up the ipad 2? how are the prices BTW... Im looking for an additional discount...

I asked her about her process FWIW. She said she made about 30 calls - half adbertising clients and half bus companies. She stated SHE selected the players herself, but largely those comapnies noted in the MW hit piece. The conversation was a bit convoluted here when i tried to determine if some sort of preselection had occurred, but she did assert it was by her direction. I believe this was her third visit, so i imagine that made up for some of the work. Im not defending her... Just relaying what i was told to help clarify the picture

Actually. I did discuss that with Rick. The issue with ping is that she looked at several months of bank statements with chops but never verified them at the bank. I pursued this is for a considerable amount of time with other posters, including Glen, as this was a rather large diligence issue that i had difficulty being comfortable with. What Rick told me is that he had seen bank statements falsified before - i believe several times. In fact he had seen or had heard stories of banks colluding with companies to commit fraud, in one instance helping a ceo embezzle money that supposedly required a cosignator that had never appeared to sign out money. Every time i spoke to him i was quite convinced there was something fraudulent going on - and remember he just was saying that they were probably overstating revenues, which at this juncture appears quite likely at the minimum. In my discussions with Rick it was quite clear he was operating with a different intention and not in any affiliation with MW or citron. He has not put forward any false information... Im not sure why you want to vilify him???

I just wrote the following over at the CGS board in response to some positive comments towards Rick. I think it should be seen here as well:

---- I have to second the props to Rick.

I spent a lot of time on the phone with Rick the last week or so and his reasoning was quite clear and his investment position was quite sound. I know he received a considerable amount of flack from the board, often very insulting - so much so that I believe he gave up trying to relay his concerns to ihub, as I am sure he had more to voice. He went out on a limb in writing what he did all while clearly acknowleging that his reasons in part where from third hand knowledge/rumors and due to issues of plausibility. I think he has seen his share of hard knocks from this sector so he is a skeptic to start, although not one unwilling to invest in a long opportunity. Of note, I dont think he had a substantial enough short position for his article to be interpreted as purely self-interest and he was perfectly willing to entertain that he may be wrong.

I raise these issues for two purposes - first, to acknowledge what he wrote was a contribution and did not deserve hostile attack. And second, to encourage him to continue to do so, as it was quite clear to me that the endeavor was a VERY unpleasant experience for him.----

I have to second the props to Rick.

I spent a lot of time on the phone with Rick the last week or so and his reasoning was quite clear and his investment position was quite sound. I know he received a considerable amount of flack from the board, often very insulting - so much so that I believe he gave up trying to relay his concerns to ihub, as I am sure he had more to voice. He went out on a limb in writing what he did all while clearly acknowleging that his reasons in part where from third hand knowledge/rumors and due to issues of plausibility. I think he has seen his share of hard knocks from this sector so he is a skeptic to start, although not one unwilling to invest in a long opportunity. Of note, I dont think he had a substantial enough short position for his article to be interpreted as purely self-interest and he was perfectly willing to entertain that he may be wrong.

I raise these issues for two purposes - first, to acknowledge what he wrote was a contribution and did not deserve hostile attack. And second, to encourage him to continue to do so, as it was quite clear to me that the endeavor was a VERY unpleasant experience for him.

Plus it can sound like anything in Chinese...

I suspect we will end up with a package of mixed news, and it may not be immediately clear which trumps what...

The factor that is not considered here reliably - except for one post that i read - is that of power and influence...

That makes no sense to me...

Ie. Get with your goddamn pranayama evrybody!

Ie. Get with your goddamn pranayama evrybody!

Nitwit... Getting a little frustrated?

i think that is a bit more human nature than anything... my guess is we are 50:50 for good news and bad, and more likely, given history here, it will be a slight mix of both... expect the unexpected sort of thing... but hopefully its all positive...

any recommendations to have the bigger upside?

i have no experience with halts on news without the news... are they typically 'give us 15 minutes and we will get back to you' or 'stop in in 2 weeks'? or is it anyones guess. i would guess a halt midday on this particular day is most consistent with ccme delivering news that everyone is waiting for....

i can see the pointlessness of this speculation, but just curious if anyone has a strong opinion one way or the other...?

tension.

do they normally halt midday before news on earnings release or 10K?

Not a synthetic short position - slightly more the opposite than to faciliate a squeeze. They are switching short share obligations (getting back the short shares and then setting up a short again) by switching over to being in a short call position and having the shares re-sold to balance that out... the regsho rules do not count that as bad behavior because it is seen as the market maker trying to facilitate liquidity...

is that right - anyone want to second that or revise it?

From what i can gather 400k or greater short share obligations - many (all?) of which likely are naked/fail to delivers - are getting shifted into conditions where they dont qualify to trigger regsho through repeated, nearly daily reciprocal deep ITM call contract exchanges between market makers. I take this to mean that there will be nothing to trigger regsho in mere days when they are finished with this business and we will fall out as we repeatedly have done up to this point. This is assuming i am broadly understanding these dynamics - if not i stand to be corrected.

I doubt management has any knowledge of or care for regsho status and i have no doubt we will be off the regsho list far before it is cuurently scheduled to kick in. This idea of a regsho-sparked short squeeze will never happen for ccme anytime in the near future. I find this a unfortunate and repeated distraction from real possibilities, not to deny the possibility that a short squeeze could be trigerred by events that declare reasonable confidence in the company's financial staements as they have been presented.

This is true, but not relevant if the calls are immediately exercised...