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.
Well that was fast! Already below $2.00 ahead of schedule. Many are going to end up with some serious losses. Well played Mr. Foote, well played.
This will be sub-$2 either today or tomorrow.
If you want to beat the short sellers. All you have to do is buy more shares than they short.
Jobs are a plenty if any one needs one. Just a take one quick look at CarLotz site:
https://www.carlotz.com/careers/
or ZipRecruiter
https://www.ziprecruiter.com/c/CarLotz/Jobs
I by no means think Humbl is a scam. But just because a CEO goes on CNBC does not mean it isn't.
Remember Theranos CEO ELizabeth Holmes?
CNBC
From the 10-K:
Great play under $8.00. I added to my position at $7.57 today. Of course LOTZ went down further immediately after my purchase. lol
New CarLotz hub locations:
Bakersfield, CA
Highland Park, IL
Dallas, TX
Denver, CO
These locations should all be open at or around the end of Q2 (June 30).
They should add this info to the FAQ in my opinion.
humblmarketplacesupport1@humblpay.com (HUMBL)
Apr 11, 2021, 05:33 GMT-11
Hello,
Thank you for contacting us. Without an active subscription, you're unable to buy or sell the BLOCK ETX's. Note that all funds stay on the exchange. Humbl Financial does not hold any of your funds. You may need to subscribe again for a new key if you stop it for awhile. Thank you for your support in HUMBL.
Best Regards,
HUMBL Support Team
______________________________________________________
I could not find an answer to this question in the FAQ and I am very new to digital currency trading so please forgive my ignorance in advance of my question. I am wondering what happens if for some reason my subscription key lapses? Do I get locked out of my account? Do my holdings get liquidated?
No, maybe $0.005 but definitely not $0.50.
I am trying to understand your logic. How does the stock price matter for Humbl Inc at the moment? If the stock price were at $3.00, $0.30, or $0.03 it matters not one bit if all if Humbl executes on their plan and starts making money hand over fist. If understand your post correctly you are suggesting that a group of investors in PayPal, Square, etc... seek to see Humbl fail by shorting or manipulating the stock price therby thwarting Humbl?
Again in my opinion the stock price means nothing right now because you can't tell how well or not the company is doing. There is no credible valuation basis at the moment. Hopefully that will change in the coming weeks when financials are posted.
No none has any no proof of manipulation one way or the other. If I had a nickel for every time I read a post stating that such and such a stock is being manipulated I would be a millionaire by now.
HMBL has had a huge run the last few months and so we shouldn't be surprised to see some profit taking right now. What the stock needs more than anything is financial information. Can't valuate question marks. Can't make projections without some data. Its all guess work right now.
This is all a fear of missing out movement. Each week SCOTUS potentially releases more opinions thus bringing the GSEs closer to freedom. I was wrong in my assumption that the GSEs would run up a day or two before each opinion release and then after disappointment move back down. Essentially it looks like now each week as the SCOTUS decision gets closer will only bring upwards momentum. The prevailing thought is that Collins will win against Treasury, no guarantee.
Many thanks for your response TenKay. I didn't know about the Series A capital raise and will look into this some more when I have time.
Hi all! I learned of HMBL stock recently and just an observer at this point . Still early in the process of learning about HMBL but it looks promising so far.
I am very curious as to why HMBL went public in the way it did. Did CEO give a rational or insight? These are questions I am hoping to learn the answers to in the coming days but if any of you can shed some light on. I have watched a bunch of recent YouTube videos of guys giving their analysis and opinion on the stock but nothing that touched upon these questions:
1. Why did HMBL go public at such an early stage of the company?
2. Why go the route of reverse merger over a traditional IPO or even SPAC?
3. Was any money raised through the process?
Thanks and I apologize in advance for such newbish questions if this has been discussed to death before.
Just noticed this but wasn't sure it was posted on here.
Looks like another opinion day on Monday (4/5/2021).
https://www.scotusblog.com/events/
I get that it is a rebuttal but its date on the letter that irks me. It means more delay because this letter was just submitted. I agree makes it look more and more illegal what the government is doing but when you have been waiting for a decision from the SCOTUS and then see this letter you know it isn't going to happen right away if correspondence like this is still flying around.
Thanks for sharing Navy. Because this letter from Cooper & Kirk is dated 3/31/2021 that would suggest that they are still gathering facts trying to make a decision on this case. I doubt the next opinion day will provide a decision on the case.
They can and have scheduled them in as little as a few days notice. You can't just look at the schedule as it stands now. They will add dates to it.
If no ruling tomorrow this will pull back a little bit (probably back to mid 1.90s). I think we will have these small run ups every week on Wednesdays or prior to the SCOTUS opinion days until the actual decision.
It could come tomorrow but I think it will be another few weeks.
I am still optimistic but the problem I see and I see it with many posters is that this is the last stand. Should SCOTUS not prevail for shareholders then the selling will be fast and hard that day. No one can predict the outcome of the SCOTUS but I am trying to prepare and look for signs so I can be one step ahead of the exits because there will be lots of exiting should the be that outcome.
If we are still waiting and it June and all cases in October, November, December have been decided except this one. I would like to say that I would be gone by then as that would signal a possible divide in the SCOTUS decision and makes holding my shares a very risk proposition with lots on this board saying its SCOTUS or bust!
I know that the SCOTUS does not have to issue opinions in the order they are heard but if at some point they start issuing more and more opinions on cases that were argued after Collins vs Mnuchin then I think that would be an ominous sign.
Not many cases left from October 2020 sitting: 2
Google LLC v. Oracle America Inc.
Ford Motor Company v. Bandemer
November 2020: 6
Borden v. U.S.
Jones v. Mississippi
Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Niz-Chavez v. Garland
Texas v. California
California v. Texas
December 2020: 6
Van Buren v. U.S.
Nestlé USA v. Doe I
CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service
Cargill v. Doe I
Edwards v. Vannoy
Facebook Inc. v. Duguid
The Collins cases were the last two argued in December. One case was argued after December and decided - Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, Decided 3.8.2021]
The SCOTUS doesn't seem to offer more than 2 opinions a week (although they could and have) which would make take roughly 7 weeks before they get to Collins cases or about mid to late May.
I would pay careful attention to how many cases that were argued after Collins, if any at all, that get decided in the coming weeks.
Dropped back down as fast as it went up. Back to $1.84/$1.85
Speaking of windfalls. The politicians seemed not to care about the retail investors windfalls in GameStop and other stocks in late January. I listed to the committee hearing and listened to how Tenev kept throwing out there the $35 billion comment on Robinhood users returns.
I often wonder would the Treasury (gov) be able to treat FNMA and FMCC as bad if the stock price rose to say $10 or $20 a share? You notice that every time the stock price got to around $4 a hit piece or some bad news would come out to send back down. If redditors all piled in as would be most welcome and drove the price overwhelmingly to a higher range would the news and stigma attached to the GSEs change as well? Would not we be still viewed as those trying to get rich off the backs of taxpayers and we would be the evil hedge funds? Or would robinhooders change the story and that it is evil government taking money from retail investors?
Correct. No different than a brokerage. I hold all my shares in TDameritrade as do many other investors on here. TDAmeritrade counts as one holder of record. Unless investors paid to have the stock converted out of street name into their own then the broker is the holder of record.
When you buy into a fund such as pension or mutual fund the same condition applies. The fund holds the underlying securities and holds it electronically in its name but keeps track of all the those who are invested in the fund.
Taken off the web:
"While securities held in street name are safe for retail investors, direct registration may be a better choice for larger investors. Stocks held in street name may be loaned to short-sellers and resold to others. So, it is possible for more than one person to own shares held in street name. If the brokerage should fail, it may not be possible to recover 100% of all securities. Investors are protected by up to $500,000 in insurance from the SIPC, but that may not be enough for high-net-worth individuals and large organizations. "
A broker yes and I am pretty sure the same for a pension fund.
LOTZ looks to be promising but I think a lot of people are waiting for first earnings release before buying. I took a risk and figured to buy now before the wave comes.
They are opening more locations so it looks like a growing business with a good business model. What's not to like at the current prices?
I hope someone writes a book about it. I would love to know what Mnuchin and Calabria and all the other players were thinking at someone point when the dust settles. It would be great to get death bed confessions from key players and actors from the start of implementation of NWS to the issues and discussions about recap and release.
We all know that ain't ever going to happen but it would make a fascinating read if it could all be compiled.
Because Gamestop (GME) proved that the market is rigged for those at the top and some investors believe that FNMA will never see its day come.
My opinion is it will be no earlier than early March. It took them forever to decide the Scelia case and I expect no different even though some of the precedent may have already been set because of that decision.
If the Supreme Court rules and rules in your favor why settle at that point? You have the win. Unless you think there is a chance that the damage amount will be low if awarded by the court.
If the SCOTUS deem the PSPA paid then the warrants are worthless. If it is indeed true that the warrants are considered collateral for the PSPA loan then collateral no longer needed as loan has been paid off. There is much debate about the warrants being considered collateral or not but I am of the camp that believe they are.
I agree they are too weak to make the right decision but I cannot fault them for that. It just seems too extreme of a remedy and one that wasn't even asked for in the lawsuit.
I don't equate it to a branch of government although it seems like it when government agencies like the FHFA make rules and regulations. I like to think of government making laws and regulations only through congress with the assistance of the court ruling on those laws and regulations. I think the problem with the creation of the FHFA lies in the origins. It was the government that loosened lending requirements or encouraged reckless behavior and then forced blame on or demanded help by the GSEs even though they weren't the source of the problem. Is it possible they were complicit? Maybe? Possibly? I don't know but the oversight that came through the creation of the FHFA was far greater than necessary and more than likely intentional.
They will not bulldoze the whole FHFA. This why they will decide that all actions are/were valid. I cannot fathom them dismantling a whole department that has been in existence for 12 years with a single court ruling -- even as much as I would love it to happen it just won't.
Thompson wasn't/isn't asking for that in the lawsuit. If the remedy is to undue all actions and bulldoze the FHFA I think that would in of itself be a bigger story than the release of Fannie and Freddie.
The FHFA is a regulator of two government sponsored enterprises. The problem isn't that there is regulation just how the regulator is structured. That can be fixed and it can continue operating like every other regulator in government.
This stock is dead money until SCOTUS ruling. Got about 5 weeks before you can even start considering an opinion issued. Remember how long we waited for the Scelia ruling? How many SCOTUSblog live updates did I sit through to finally get it near or at the end of the SCOTUS term. It was the last or almost last opinion issued for that term. I expect no different this time around either.
This news although not unexpected is not bad news at all. The GSEs continue to be recapped through retained earnings until the next event which would be the SCOTUS ruling. Future incoming administration for Treasury and FHFA can't change this amendment for them to stop retaining earnings until a SCOTUS ruling on the NWS.
--WHY?--
Because you have already publicly committed to the recapitalizing of the the GSEs. The FHFA is appointed as conservator. If they change course on this and suddenly say no we will continue to take your money after saying no we won't will definitely look bad in the eyes of future litigation if not the current ongoing litigation. How can a conservator by definition allow you to hold on to capital and then suddenly say no and still be considered a conservator. I guess this is the big question in the eyes of the SCOTUS right now.
To me it all points back to the amendment allowing the GSEs to retain capital up to $45 billion combined. That amendment came very shortly after the 5th circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. They had to stop taking money--they had a court ruling against them continuing the practice. The sweep will end once and for all and only if the SCOTUS decide in favor of the shareholders.