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.
“Naked short more…”
More????
There is no naked short on DPLS.
And I am willing to bet RMA are not required to cut a check to Mullen until a vehicle is actually sold to an end use customer.
Keep an eye off the revenue and changes in accounts receivable.
Michery is working straight out of the OTC playbook.
LMAO I had not even looked at the 3 year chart…and yes that looks like $330,000 per share split adjusted.
Like lemmings off a cliff….
“The FIVE RS is expected to be produced in late 2025, followed by customer sales in mid-2026.”
This is complete bullshit hype. The FIVE or FIVE RS will never see actual production. He could never raise enough money to do so.
He would need at least $1 Billion.
He had to sacrifice the share price to the tune of a 99.99% drop just to get $250 million.
Why people fall for this nonsense is beyond me.
It should have been a huge red flag to anyone that the amount of his “bonus” shares awards were to be calculated based on a PERCENT OF THE OS and not an absolute number of shares like normal companies.
He has always known what the dilution would do to the share price.
Link to one of the interviews with Brad?
The only thing I had heard from him is about the “interest” in testing the vehicle.
Over $120,000 per share (split adjusted) two years ago!
LMFAO
IHub recently adjusted the historical chart to account for the most recent split. Look at the 1 year and 2 year charts…LMAO.
J.J. went with the sold assets and is now working for Hussle the rebranding of the Saas tech that was sold to Scaleworks. Scaleworks recently flipped it to Galexxy LLC.
As for McKinley, who left well before J.J., he appears to be working in/on/for a non-profit.
It’s mostly electronic now. As I said, most companies no longer issue paper certs.
I would suggested learning how things work nowadays.
some terms to learn:
DWAC
eCOD
ECN
What “original certificates”?. Most companies these days no longer issue stock in certificate form.
And DTCC doesn’t clear, NSCC does. DTCC is responsible for settlement. But again with most companies issuing stock via DWAC there is no paper involved.
I am not sure how you think all this works, but Mullen isn’t using paper.
There are no Mullen certs. There is no evidence that they have ever issued paper
There is no evidence that Mullen has ever issued stock in certificate form. In fact, the opposite.
If you look at the description provided for shareholders as to how the split was implemented, there is zero discussion of certificates or any sort of cert exchange process…because there are none.
You are, once again, just rambling on about random shit you apparently know little about.
Why would they not have the product ready to roll out well before Christmas and New Years?…only the single highest consumption of alcohol in a single week on the planet.
This isn’t serious…
Is this the stock market’s version of Schrödinger’s Cat? lol
Huh? “contract to borrow all the rights off of somebody that owns shares”…That’s not even a thing.
I swear I feel a little bit dumber every time I read one of your posts.
“You just borrow the shares, but instead of selling them, you keep them.... Doesn't become a failure to deliver that way, and they don't count failures to return.“
You’re joking right? 🤣
Is a shorted “short share” a long share?
The ignorance here is astounding at times…
“…and it got very little downside risk“
You are obviously ignoring what Michery said…
He said they will need to continue to dilute in 2024.
It will just be more of the same.
I predict the share price will be down another 90% at least in 2024 and probably more.
They have no other way of raising money than selling equity which has already tanked the share price by 99.99%. That is a 90% drop happening FOUR TIMES in a row. A fifth is not hard to contemplate.
Borrow “short shares”??? WTF is that?
Do people just make shit up because it sounds good?
Put the bong away.
Most rational people would consider a stock that has dropped over 99.99% to be game over.
Rory sunk between $80-$100 MILLION of shareholders money into the Saas business AFTER they bought Sound Concepts in 2019.
EIGHTY TO ONE HUNDRED MILLION….
…and they ended up having to sell that business for a little over $6 million.
Why he is still CEO is beyond me…oh wait…Geiskopf was always Rory’s buddy enabling him while he drew a six figure salary as the lead Board member for a company that had revenue of less than $10 million.
Your bizarre posts just keep making my point.
You really don’t know very much do you…
LOL WUT?
“How to hell can you do a reverse split on a short the short needs to be fully closed out before any reverse split because it has been loaned out the short should not be allowed to reverse because it does not exist reversing both is a double reverse“
LOL…the idea that a short position has to be covered because of a RS is a myth…particularly prevalent on the OTC. A short position survives an RS and simply is reduced by the RS ratio. For example in the case of Mullen a short position of 1000 shares prior to the RS simply becomes a short position of 10 shares after the RS
Two things…
1) I am talking about the vehicles that supposedly have already been delivered and invoiced per the two PR’s. Unless they are completely fabricating it those should show up in the filing for period ending 12/31/23.
2) MULN’s fiscal year end is 9/30/23. The 10K for which is due today unless they file an NT-10K which is likely since they did it last year. That would push the filing deadline to January 15, 2024. Their 10Q for Q1 for period ending December 31, 2023 is due on February 14, 2024…which they can extend to Feb 19.
Therefore we should see the first indications of the financial treatment of those “deliveries” mid Feb.
I didn’t hear the supposed interview so I don’t actually know who said what and the context. Stuff gets pretty warped by the time it hits a message board. My recollection is that someone “talked” to a sales guy at RM and he told him that there was a lot of interest and posted such somewhere. But that was it.
Do you actually have a link to the interview?
But putting that aside, Michery takes any and every opportunity to pump a “sale”. Even if it is only one or two vehicles for a “test”…yet they are keeping quiet about all these suppose “presold” vehicles?
No way.
They are moving the ELMS stock to RMA. What has actually been sold is anyone’s guess but when Michery doesn’t actually say it, it means it is less than what his “believers” imaginations think…
RMA is at zero risk on any of this so why wouldn’t they play along.
Have you noticed they have made sure to keep the Mullen part of their business completely separate from their actual auto/truck business. That is a tell for me.
If they actually sold anything to end use customers they would have said so. They make a big fricken deal over the few 1 or 2 that actually do get delivered to a customer
And yet we get silence on these RMA deliveries…
Who is actually buying them? Is Mullen simply paying to store them there?
We, of course, will get no visibility into what is actually happening right now until mid Feb…when the fins are filed…
The fact they are referring to "invoicing" is odd. They are not saying it is revenue...but "invoiced". While under normal circumstances Revenue can be claimed when something is delivered as either unbilled revenue or if invoiced the revenue is a trade receivable, I think something else is going on.
Those vehicles have not been sold to an end customer, as far as we know (or else they would be making a big deal about it), but rather just delivered to RMA.
As you pointed out, if RMA does not sell them within a year then they can be returned to Mullen for a full refund. Therefore the accounting treatment of all this for Q! ending December 31 (reporting on February 15) will be interesting.
Do they claim the revenue and then book a liability against it for potential returns?
Keep an eye on the cashflow statement, Account Receivable changes and any new liability showing up on the balance sheet against any of those deliveries.
This whole daily PR thing and "deliveries" is being used to keep the stock price up until at least Jan 22....but eventually the piper has to be paid.
I have been warning about this stock for the last year and a half.
Anyone that believed the hype only has themselves to blame.
Sorry for your losses.
And I should care about that why?
It’s interesting that you can’t really find any reference to Mullen on their main website. I can’t find a link to the Randymarionmullen website if it’s even there. And a few times I have tried to go to the RMMullen website it won’t open.
It is all rather odd.
It will be interesting to see how those “deliveries” are handled on the financial statements for Q1.
That may tell us something about what is actually going on.
It’s odd they refer to “invoiced” and not revenue.
And yet again, have not heard of a single one.
Worse than a lot of OTC financing deals…lol.
Michery’s need for cash over the next year or two will be the end of Mullen as it currently exists.
The interest rate they quote is a distraction…to cover up the fact they are actually paying 225% annualized rate on the loan.
They will get $32 million on January 1 and have to repay $50 million 3 months later.
The $18 million is called an “original issue discount”…but it is nothing more than the vig to the lender.
so they are paying about 56% for a three month loan.
“CompetitorTech” should be your first clue it is fake…likely AI generated.
There is no evidence of such a lawsuit and HMBL would have had to file an 8K.
The terms of the note are awful. They are essentially paying an annual interest rate of 225%.