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.
If you keep saying in a company is in a startup phase its like the boy who cried wolf. Really no one (except you) believes that they are in a startup phase right now. A twitter poll would be very revealing on this discussion.
If college kids can create facebook with a shoestring budget why can't Humbl? Humbl creates but the public yawns -- that is the problem! They haven't produced anything meaningful. If there was meaningful development going on behind the scenes people would be talking about it. No one talks about Humbl at least not in a positive light.
Pharm companies take years because of the clinical testing and FDA requirements. If not for those laws and regulations, they would be out selling and marketing their product ASAP.
You are literally comparing a heavily regulated/red tape sector to the tech sector that has few to little barriers to entry and saying it could take years. Nope not buying it. Humbl has their products but the problem is no one wants them. NFTs have been on the decline for months now. Crypto is imploding with bankruptcy after bankruptcy. Just a bad sector to be "starting up" in right now. They have no revolutionary tech because if they did there would be buzz on the streets about it. Considering they have little to no media attention outside of the Forbes article mention and the CNBC segment, both of which are looking very dated now, they sure could use some media attention not just twitter hype posts or message forum BS.
Can't wait for 2023 to come and go so I can stop hearing the BS excuse that Humbl is still a startup when we all know that you could give Humbl five years and it still would amount to nothing.
Another loss! The courts keep ruling against any avenue of recovery.
The problem with suing FHFA as conservator is that they set the capital requirements. So as long as the FHFA can say the companies are not adequately capitalized, I see no way for a lawsuit to succeed. I think the problem is that FHFA is both conservator and rule maker. HERA grants the FHFA that authority and is the law of the land.
From page 44 of the opinion:
I started buying. My concern with this is that the dividend has dropped since inception and has never been raised. This might be one to avoid because of further dividend cuts.
Why would the Government settle the conservatorship? They gain nothing and only stand to lose because they hold all the cards as of right now. They have been winning at this game for 14+ years. If they wanted to settle, they would have after they realized that winding down was no longer an option. Right now, keeping the status quo is their best option and they will continue to do so until they are forced to change.
Remember the SCOTUS decreed that FHFA can keep sweeping the profits and do so as long as it wants because it is in the public interest. If I were playing the game, I wouldn't give one inch with my opponent in reaching any kind of settlement when you have rule makers backing you.
If true that is great news! Having to wait a year for another trial would be a real downer but 90 days ain't so bad. New Judge too would be welcome in my opinion. Lamberth is garbage but it kind of is luck of the draw as you might get some Obama appointee.
I don't believe so, but I am definitely not a legal scholar in this area. Lamberth has all knowledge and facts of the case. Transferring to a different judge would be unusual in my opinion. Its like telling a collogue here is a ton or work that I spent two weeks on now you go figure it out. But who knows maybe thats how it works?!
The jurisdiction was assigned to this Federal 5th Circuit I am not sure how you could change jurisdiction at this point.
Lamberth does not want to sit through another 2+ weeks trial again. He certainly will do everything he can to prevent a mistrial.
It seems obvious to me that the jury trying to convince the 4 holdouts that based on the definitions in layman terms wanted the transcript of Demaco's testimony. After getting the definition those that were actually paying attention, wanted the those that didn't, to see that what Demarco testified was an arbitrary act.
The longer this goes the foggier one's memory becomes. Our hope in winning diminishes each day that passes.
The clerk knocks on the door to bring lunch to the jurors. Opens the door and behold a scene almost out of Fight Club of six women all hooting and hollering around two others fighting on the floor.
Thats where my imagination takes me when I think about the deliberations right now.
It doesn't take two years to start producing meaningful results. You have no idea. They spend millions in losses and literally have so little to show for it. Two years and the company is still at infancy. Well that looks like poor execution, poor leadership and poor planning. What company can really be taken seriously if they one minute say "hey we are going into the crypto mining business" and then the next minute say wait "no we don't really want to do that." Foote runs the company by throwing darts at ideas on a dart board.
Everything this company does is a joke including the reverse split. Every investor deserves to get crushed and whipped out by it. Buy now and get reversed and then watch the price fall even faster back to the $.02 level again.
We can only hope that the jury is hung at this point. The longer it goes the worse I fear that the jury rules 5-3 for the Defendents.
Carvana will be going under sometime in 2023. They couldn't turn a profit in the hottest used car market ever. Let that sink in. The company couldn't make money when used car prices were climbing. Now that car prices are cooling the losses will accumulate faster. Oh and they got suspended in Michigan. Add that to growing number of states they have had trouble with.
Any thoughts on the 8 women to 1 man jury pool? Do you think that ratio bodes well for the Plaintiffs? I rather see it the opposite 8 men to 1 woman because I don't know if women would understand the financial nuances to this case, but that is just the sexist in me.
Hate to break it to you but the jury selection is part of the trial.
You would hear no complaints from me if it could pull off a run like it did from before the ticker change from TNSP. Sadly, I don't think that is going to happen.
To create a run like that they need revenue on one of their products or services they provide that can show a profit margin. Has Humbl ever discussed profit margins on any of their products or services? Providing a path to profitability or even a free cash flow projection would also go a long way to regain the trust of investors. Again, I don't think that will ever happen.
From $0.10 to $0.09 to $0.05, $0.04, $0.03, $0.02 sure looks like a pattern over time to me. Yes there were a few green days along the way but it still got all the way down to the $0.01s. Maybe just maybe you can declare victory over Pref B's not sending HMBL into oblivion if this reversal from the low continues. Otherwise it's just another bump along the decent down.
This company does not make a profit. It can't even settle on a business idea that lasts longer than a couple of months. ETXs, crypto mining, marketplace, P2P, Search3, Myles Garrett NFTs? All smoke and no substance. It seems that the more Humbl does the lower the share price goes. Maybe Humbl should stop burning money on non-profitable adventures and get serious about one thing.
No reasonable investor at this stage would buy Humbl stock at any price point because there is only going to be a lower price point tomorrow. If you like burning your money up in flames you might as well invest in Humbl.
Doubtful SEC will ever do anything. Investors lose money for making an awful investing decision all the time and while the companies themselves are probably being deceitful they are also probably technically not breaking the law.
This is no different that OTC scams of years ago where a company would press release that they have a contract with AT&T and how wonderful the contract would be for the OTC company only to find out that it was a phone service contract for long distance.
While technically the company did have a signed contract with AT&T long distance service and everything in the PR was true it is shameful and deceitful to those with "hopes" for the company.
I call HMBL a scam not because by the letter of the law it is so but because of the lies and deception that only a fool could ignore. HMBL tries and show that they are working hard at making some BS product, service, widget, or whatever! but really HMBL has no intent to bring the company to a high and lofty size -- just lip service.
The value of any company most certainly matters when being spun off. The problem is since being acquired by Humbl did any company acquired increase in value? What did Humbl pay for the asset being spun off? Seeing that Humbl's market cap shrank considerably since any of their acquisitions leads me to believe that they aren't likely to get any more than they paid for.
Nope. Maybe in another 2-3 weeks after but a loss after Lamberth case and the GSEs will drop further.
Thanks for explanation. With the Justices on the SCOTUS I do think I like the chances they have on appeal but will probably be disappointed with the outcome again if they go that route.
But can the 2-1 decision be appealed now? I get the remand but if ROP doesn't agree with the 2-1 decision could they appeal without waiting forever for the remand?
Last paragraph on last page from ROP decision:
Question for all the legal scholars out there: ROP is decided 2-1 in favor of defendants with a remand to the lower court for further possible action. Can or should ROP (Plaintiff) appeal this decision? Or wait for the lower court to decide and then appeal?
People invest in it but most lose money if they are holding for the long haul. That's why I would say it is crazy to invest (again investing not flipping) in liars and thieves. You honestly think Foote isn't getting rich off the backs of retail investors?
I would agree who would want to invest in the OTC? Most of it is garbage. I used to before I wizened up. Its full of companies that will fail and never make a dime. I can think of 3 or 4 companies that are legit on the OTC but most are garbage.
Who would want to invest in liars and thieves? That's just crazy!
How is this good for the Plaintiffs? They got denied all their motions and the Defendants theirs partially granted. Not a win for us by any means.
Ok you believe that the rewards for shareholders will come. Surely you have a time frame of when that might be and would you care to share? Do you believe that averaging down on a stock that is worth next to nothing, has little to no revenues to speak of and needs to dilutes daily to keep its doors open is a good strategy?
Maybe I am naive and I just don't get it. If I were running a company successfully for decades doing business the same way year after year why would I feel threatened by the government? If the criminal charges being brought forth were bogus why take a plea deal? I would want to prove my innocence and see my day in court and have justice prevail. You don't get to charge someone with robbing a bank just because they work there. You need evidence that shows they had keys, access, embezzlement, a paper trail etc. I find it hard to believe that all these board members were people of integrity if they ran for the hills the moment Paulson came knocking at their door.
Thank you for that info but please excuse my ignorance with my follow up question: Legal liability - what exactly would they be liable for? When I hear that term I think they would be sued but how is that any different for any board of any other company? Lots of companies go bankrupt and none of the board get sued unless found negligent or criminal. I still don't see the leverage unless you are saying Paulson would have them be prosecuted criminally for the state of affairs with the GSEs? Is it possible that they knowingly had the GSEs buy mortgages from the banks knowing the bogus credit scores, income verifications and other false or missing underwriting info?
I just think the board of directors would not have taken the "deal" from Paulson unless it really was true that they were going to be liable for the screw up state of affairs which then lends itself some credibility to the death spiral scenario. That is my main concern with all of this.
Can someone refresh my memory? What was the leverage the Government had on the GSE boards to convince them to step aside (or step down?) and let the Government enact their take over? I keep reading the "heads hitting the floor comment" but I never understand what Paulson had on them to say you better agree to this or else.
Why couldn't the GSEs just ignored the offer (whatever it was) and say no we are good and you can go eff yourselves?
Thats the one thing nagging me all this time. If anyone new how the GSEs were going to turnaround the Board of shareholders must have. I have to think that they believed the death spiral enough to go along with the Government plan.
HMBL has sub-penny written all over its future. Why buy any now? If you liked it at $.07 or $.06 or $.05 or $.04 you will love it at $.01 and lower.
There is no point to buying shares today that you can get much, much cheaper in the future.