love it!

GSPI - huge volume today

Yep. Often times the Nobo report can be a sign of desperation either the company is doing some kind of finagle or they’re trying to untangle a naked short situation.

The 95 reflects consolidation of shares held in street name by each broker. Of those 95 "shareholders", a good number are entities like Schwab or eTrade etc. who show as 1 shareholder while in fact there could be hundreds or thousands of beneficial holders that hold their shares at Schwab.

To get a true count you would need to do a NOBO report (Notice of Beneficial Ownership). These are expensive, but occasionally a company will ask for this. Companies do this once i a while.

Brokers plus some insiders who may have shares in certificate form, possibly from private placements or even shares from before the entity went public.

Not lazy TAs at all - that is how the system works. There is no way a TA could give an accurate count of the shareholders for, say, T or TSLA or AMZN if they attempted to count true beneficial shareholders on a daily basis. That would be totally unworkable.

It just looks funny with these little OTC stocks where you end up with very small numbers being shown.

To get a true count you would need to do a NOBO report (Notice of Beneficial Ownership). These are expensive, but occasionally a company will ask for this. Companies do this once in a while.

The count you are seeing is the number of brokers that hold shares for customers plus the number of people who hold shares directly and certificate form. That’s the shareholder account from the transfer agent perspective to get a full articulated list of all the individuals that would hold the stock you would need to get a beneficial owners report

The reason the share account looks small is that many of the shares are held in Street name. That means if you and I and 98 other people hold shares at Schwab, it is counted as one shareholder not 100.

Hard to get excited about 291 shares volume on a penny stock. $3. Big whup.

I guess we keep waiting. I have little confidence that we won't see another extension in September.

I added some shares today at .019 after speaking to Steve Murphy at LBRG. I like their plans for share reductions and adding new websites.

I agree - the real value comes from being able to read 100 messages at a time and to put an unlimited number of people on ignore. PMs are really icing on the cake.

Neither is a big deal if you are only reading this board.

I believe that iHub offers "Happy Hour" every Friday during which everyone gets free PM capability. They sometimes offer the same for a week or so for various reasons. That may explain why it is sometimes frère to you and sometimes they ask you to pay.

hmm - site looks pretty good - way better than what I expected.

iHub was really slow late last week - it seems better now.

Last week the site was slow on my main PC, but ok on my other devices. Since it appeared to be device-specific, I cleared out all the cookies for iHub on my main PC and that seemed to help.

A pre-revenue company has very simple finances - there is no need to pay top dollar for a top-tier accounting firm.

"SEVERELY DELINQUENT FINANCIALS" - IS THAT SOMETHING LIKE "DOUBLE SECRET PROBATION?

I really doubt they would take shares purely on speculation. They would need to get enough shares so that they could sell (on the bid) for at least as much as the cash they would have received. Some might sell all, some might let the balance ride, but it would be astounding if they did not sell enough to get paid (and pay their staff) immediately.

In that case, we could go with "We sell NFTs and allow folks to BABL about it AND BLOCK EACH OTHER on iHub"?

Or we could wait for a name change

How about "We sell NFTs and allow folks to BABL about it on iHub"? Catchy!

Take shares for what?

Are you talking about MVNT using shares to pay for services, and asking why would a provider of such services accept shares as payment?

In that scenario the simple answer is that they would generally get more value in shares than if they took cash. Here's a hypothetical case - MVNT buys services for which the cash cost would be $1,000, and, with the stock trading at .01 bid .02 ask (again, hypothetical - I am using easy numbers to work with), MVNT offers to give them 200K shares of stock so as to conserve that $1000 in cash. Assuming the stock was out of the treasury and not restricted, and also assuming there was enough liquidity to actually absorb 200K shares on the bid, then the service provider could sell the stock for $2000 (instead of the $1000 they would have received, OR they could sell 100K at .01 to get their $1000 and let the rest ride.

While I have made the numbers up for convenience, the basic premise is true. The only way a service provider would accept shares in lieu of cash is if the shares were worth more RIGHT AWAY than the cash.

The good things about the symbol change would be that it offers the opportunity to align the symbol with the actual business model of the "new" company going forward and to communicate that more consistently. It also has the effect of isolating the admittedly sketchy history of "BABL" from the results when people search for news etc. using the new symbol.

It would be nice to see it actually trade there.

The best we can hope for is that the symbol change (and, presumably name change) will be the signal that they start to tell the story. In many cases companies do wait to release info until they have the long term symbol in place so that when someone searches on that symbol (or new name) all the history is there.

Yes - for a symbol change done in isolation. I am sure that does not change the capital structure.

Generally, however, a symbol change is only done when there is a name change, and a name change is only done when there is a change in business focus. A change in business focus might be triggered by new investment which WOULD of course change the capital structure.

A symbol change is just that - a change to the trading symbol. NOTHING else changes.

Happens all the time. Not a great thing but not cause for indignation.

No problem - just a typo. Actually 2026 is better as it means the warrants have a longer run before expiry.

The way Schwab displays the tile of the IONQ warrants it would appear that they expire in 2026. Are you sure about 2025?

Hard to say, since they are in stealth mode…🥹

There has been no comma period 😀

It doesn’t.

I am stuck too. I don't have any recent or current information.

Feeling good Louis

I thought Otiko was corporate was VDRM. First I have heard of anyone else associated with the company, let alone admitting to it!

A step forward, I guess.

Right - it is normal for the company to file to lift the restriction as soon as the restricted period has passed. That is the expectation of everyone who participated in the restricted shares offering. Companies that don't promptly lift the restrictions piss of their investors and find it more difficult to raise further funding using restricted shares.

That is pretty standard - they are not required to show more/full depth.

more legit than any PR Otiko has ever put out...

I got filled for a princely 146 shares at .0225 on the 8th. I was bidding for many more than that. I think the MM was just being spiteful, giving me a fill for $3.28. I also got 14 at .0221 on 12/29. Commission was more than the principal amount on both of those...

Probably not. Just two trades - one for 100K shares and one for 110 shares. Not a groundswell of buying.

Company management would be a place to start.