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.
I would guess that it's someone playing games to manipulate the bid and ask. Remember, some of these traders may have an interest in shorting the stock, so it's very easy to set some low bids in place and take some of your previously own shares and sell at these low bid prices. Especially, 5 shares, etc. when you don't have to worry about transaction fees. Do this for a few days and watch the inexperienced shareholder become nervous and begin to bring down there asking price or suddenly feel the need to sell. IMO, this is how this stock is currently trading. As for the person or multiple people selling a thousand shares here and a thousand shares there in the .03 range...they are eating a significant loss considering this is .0003 value prior to the R/S. The significant cheapies prior to the R/S came at a value of .0005. With the "D" attached to the symbol for a month, no word from the company yet in regard to the R/S reasoning, and a new tax season, these trades seem illogical from any common share seller. IMO
Yes they can, if you look at Verizon's existing "Partnership Program" you can see various smaller companies that have developed products/services that Verizon has found an opportunity and willingness to work in relationship with in order to expand the use of Verizon's own products and services. IMO, Verizon's R&D team, do not spend their energies inventing every "component of the wheel". In a rapidly changing technological environment, Verizon, continues to seek synergy with other companies which need Verizon services to utilize and develop their own services. It's a win/win. I'm sure their R&D department are influential in these findings. All IMO.
I COULD CARE A LESS THAT YOU ARE on the bid nor would I sell my shares at these levels based upon what I potentially see here. My discussions with fellow shareholders are intelligent conversations discussing the facts and opinions concerning the potential rise or fall of this company's PPS. I'm not looking for an escape and if you've followed my previous posts you would know I'm a long term investor. By the way, I probably own more shares than you. GLTU. I was always wondering how a WHALE like yourself doesnt swim with a pod?
I agree, if those authorized shares get sold into the open market I would expect a collapse in share price. What can of substantial PPS past the current .04 could you expect with almost a billion shares in circulation.
Yea that's the part that I don't like with a R/S. A decrease in the outstanding shares yet the ability to maintain the existing authorized shares count. Ultimately the creation of additional shares in the treasury. We will have to see what she does with them if they are used to compensate insiders or are used for dilution. If she decides to use them for dilution I don't see this PPS seeing substantial increases into silver land. At a potential of 950,000,000 shares in the float I can't see this heading north of .05. Maybe a pump or two but those of us that have been around will have little faith in growth potential of PPS.
Yes, based upon the current DD that pennypuptech had pointed out and several of us have discussed thru the past several months, I do see the possibility of a valuation at $1.00 plus. As far as the authorized share count being 750,000,000 after the RS, what gives you that inclination? The float is less than 5 million but we have no disclosure in regard to share structure after the R/S. My point is, if the share structure stays in proportion to pre R/S and the company discloses PR's concerning product/services then this stock has some potential to easily surpass $1.00 IMO. Flippers and short term investors would love to see .20 and then an attempt to short the heck out of it, but I see true long term potential in this play as long as our CEO has a solid business plan which has yet to be disclosed. IMO
We should have easily seen a PPS of .01 prior to the R/S based upon some of the developments in regard to the direction of the company. Post R/S that would equate to a PPS of 1.00. If we see details regarding the direction of this company in a series of PR's following this R/S and our CEO maintains a low authorized share count, I still believe we will see share price in excess of $1.00. Flippers will be looking for .20 while long term investors may see a life changer here IMO.
Great post pennypuptech, very informative and I agree with the connections you have pointed out. Important facts for all the investors here and we will have to see how this pans out for shareholders.
Pennypuptech, what's your knowledge or opinion in regard to the possible conversions that occurred in September? I posted a previous message addressed to you.
Yes I was thinking those were already converted in September and part of the existing float. A conversion in September missed the Verizon news run to .005. I'm figuring that investor is still holding shares waiting on news and developments like everyone else. If this is the case I figured our CEO would have some loyalty to PPS along with further development of this company and its product/service. I believe there is a reason behind the R/S other than dilution and has to do with potentially uplisting and terms of a Verizon relationship, etc.
Pennypuptech, getting back to our conversation, wasn't there some convertibles back in September that were valued at .001. These shares converted after the Verizon news and short run to .005, so this individual would not have had an opportunity to capitalize on that run. After the Reverse Split those shares valued at .001 would need to see share price values at .10. I would think at some point our CEO would be releasing news again to sustain some sort of decent PPS for this investor who was compensated with common shares? Just a thought, what is your knowledge and opinion in regard to the existence of these Seotember convertibles?
Great post but I have a difference in opinion when it comes to shareholders. Shareholders should have an expectancy from the company's CEO. Shareholder's should also be considered and respected since this is a public company partially owned by shareholders. Our CEO may not be diluting or relying on finances from shareholder's at this point in the game, but let's not forget the past. I'm sure our invested dollars where the financial catalyst which moved this company to its current development. It certainly wasn't revenue from product and services. I don't agree with that mentality of disowning shareholders due to a handful of clowns.
I believe the last R/S value was .0006.
Nothing in my statements suggest that I agree with you. Perhaps you are being facetious. Once again, you missed my point that IMO you most likely don't have any DD to disprove that a "legal binding partnership" exists between Telefix and Verizon because the details concerning their relationship have not been disclosed at this point. Here is what we do know.
Right now it is all speculation. I personally received confirmation thru email that their is a "Relationship" of some nature between Telefix and Verizon. Whether Telefix is able to do something with that relationship, as far as having a viable product/service that is ready for the marketplace, is another question. The lack of clarity in the seminar transcript is a concern of mine. I agree we don't see any evidence of "legal signings" between Telefix and Verizon, but that doesn't mean they don't currently exist. We have no idea what transpires behind close doors between representatives of these two companies. My guess is related to the "Partnership Program" at the least.
Do you have a source which negates the possibility that their is a "legally signed agreement" between Telefix and Verizon? I don't believe any of us have that information at this point in time because the legal nature of the "relationship" between Telfix and Verizon, if there currently is one, has not been disclosed by either company. This burden of proof needs to fall on the company's CEO in having transparency and disclosure toward the shareholders. Perhaps there is a non disclosure agreement that prevents this, at this time. We shareholders know very little, if anything in regard to the reasoning behind this reverse split, the formation of Telefix Technologies, and the possibility of a reverse merger. Stay tuned I guess.
Thanks for that info. I have to check my previous emails with Verizon and see what language I used as far as "relationship" and "partnership". I had received confirmation from two individuals confirming some sort of "relationship".
Yes, and it appears you are missing my question. What DD or evidence have you researched or discovered that negates the possibility that Telefix does not currently have or are in the process of signing a legal agreement, a "Partnership" with Verizon. If you have something that you would like to bring to the attention of shareholders, I most certainly would like to know. If this is your own speculation then I have nothing more to say in regard to the topic.
I said "relationship" to appease your issue with the word partnership. Any statements in regard to the nature of the "relationship" between Telefix and Verizon is speculative at this point IMO. Your statements continue to negate the possibility of a "Partnership" citing legal contracts, etc., but what DD did you find that eliminates this possibility or remotely discussed the "relationship" between Telefix and Verizon?
I apologized because I indicated you were wrong when in fact you math was correct. I should have realized my error prior to responding based upon my own share conversions, but it was early and a miscalculation. GLTA
Please state where your facts are coming from so the rest of us can verify with DD. As far as I'm aware, none of us, other than the statements publicly released in the PRs, have any knowledge concerning what the specifics are pertaining to Telefix's relationship with Verizon?? We don't know if any contracts or agreements were signed or if this was a verbal alliance?
YOU ARE CORRECT, THANKS FOR THE CORRECTION!
Yes, my apologies, I was incorrect, saying one thing but thinking another. Thanks for your correction.
Yea I'm aware, this is what we have been debating, what the relationship is with Verizon. No clear details yet in regard to the specifics or if their PRs are strickly referencing the "Partnership Program".
No that is incorrect. 1:100 reverse split. The individual had 3,692,000 shares prior to the reverse split so they will now own 369,200 shares not 36,920.
No, that's incorrect! It's a 1:100 reverse split. The individual had over 3,000,000 shares so the reverse split brings him to 300,000 plus.
369,200 after the reverse split.
We don't know the specifics of what Telefix has with Verizon at this point. And yes, they are called "partnerships". Take time and do some DD into their "partnership program" GLTA
https://m2mdeveloper.verizon.com/deploy/verizon-partner-program
I disagree with you Toybaby. Verizon is a large and thriving public company that continues to pursue growth opportunities in the technology sector in order to continue the growth of their products and services. You can bet they have internal departments (marketing/publicity) overseeing their "Branding Image". In addition, their executives overseeing their "Partnership Program" are interested in doing business with viable companies which share an interest in the evolving technology movement. They are Interested in making money thru joint Initiatives, not lending their name to a start up company that wants to capitalize on selling common stock shares. IMO, they have an interest in the integrity of the companies they form partnerships with (you are a direct reflection of the people you spend time with or do business with). All IMO
I'm actually considering contacting Verizon again and inquiring/validating an existing relationship. I had two gentleman from Verizon verify the relationship following the previous PR. They were not willing to expand on any statements other than stating their was a relationship. I think I'll take the liberty to discuss some of my personal opinions and observations concerning Telefix Communications. If these two companies are planning on doing business together in some capacity, I'm sure Verizon is adament about sustaining their integrity by taking into consideration the companies they align themselves with and how these companies are perceived in the public's eye and what level of respect and preservation they have for their shareholders. If this reverse split along with potential reverse merger has some rational reasoning which benefits the company and its investors, then no harm done. If a "product roll out" is just BS to maintain a facade and continue to sell stock then Verizon IMO is guilty by association.
Very valid info. And that's why she needs to PR, to prevent that shorting mentality! I personally haven't shorted this or any other stock in the past so I feel she owes long term shareholders like myself and others some disclosure. If she had any interest in maintaining share price this is detrimental. Don't forget she has to have insiders who were compensated with common shares too.
I agree. I speculate $5 a share because I believe that if share holders were informed thru PR's prior to the split concerning the relationship with Verizon and product rollout, we could have easily supported a PPS of .05. I have owned other stocks that were in similiar product developmental stages that visited that PPS. They had similiar share structures prior to the split too. Personally, my experience with reverse splits has been the latter you mention. All IMO.
I agree with you, if the intention of this reverse split and possible reverse merger is for sustaining a higher PPS for possible uplisting in the future and too attract a different breed of investors, then IMO this CEO needs to follow up with a series of PR's reaffirming a relationship with Verizon, details in regard to a product rollout, and financial projections based upon subscription criteria from Verizon and cost of subscription. If this reverse split is designed to re-create a bank of common shares for dilution then this stock will sink back to where it originated pre-split. I would like to believe this isn't the intention since our CEO did not dilute shares which were available during our last run. This CEO should have put her disdain toward this market and its investors aside where it belongs months ago figuring she had personally capitalized on this market and Telefix communications wouldn't be to the point where it is today without share structure and common share investment. IMO, sometimes ego steps in and people forget what sustained their vision as far as financing. You don't show your dislike for a particular element of a market pool by classifying the whole as a few of its dirty parts. There are many solid investors in this market too who have invested their hard earned money. Keeping shareholders in the dark, in regard to a reverse split and the direction of the company which is owned by shareholders, is audacious and ignorant. I understand she is a majority shareholder but that doesn't justify keeping other owners in the dark. I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt, that she has vision and direction, but at this point some of her actions and commentary with fellow shareholders presents more questions then answers. All IMO of course. I do believe, if there is a substantial product rollout and relationship with Verizon, this stock could easily see a PPS of $5. GLTA and some of us should consider sticking together in regard to sell points when more information is disclosed by the company as far as direction. I will decipher what shares will be held long term from this point after that disclosure. Invested since 2012.
Approved by shareholders, which shareholders would this statement be referring too?
That's exactly what he/she did IMO, orchestrated his own pump. No conscious screwing other investors as long as he/she and possibly a few buddies could exit.
I ALSO have been accumulating and will HIT after the R/S so I second that statement toward SHORTERS!
In my opinion, I don't see the logic in announcing a R/S at this time considering the gap between the current outstanding shares and authorized share count. There was no dilution at the time of the last PR stating their relationship with Verizon. I would expect to see a run that they would dilute into prior to a R/S or perhaps we will see a different motive behind a R/S such as uplisting and not dilution. Just a guess.
I'm assuming your post was in reference to my post? As far as being a shareholder, I've been here for probably four years as a shareholder and own over 7 million shares. Most of my post was stating what I felt this company needed in order to see a successful rise in PPS.
I believe Your wrong. The Intellectual property is owned by Telefix Communications.
So many posts on this board are non-sense and useless unless the objective is to bring the price down and deter new investors in the future.