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.
What interest does the DR have now?
Why would they invest?
KO, don't confuse the bad apple here.
I usually agree with your honest posts and the realistic outlook of SSTP's future, especially with the bad past of Rivera and his team. But I do believe Garjian's past and recent attempts at revitalizing this concept are pretty sincere, and it will take a lot longer than what posters here propose it will occur to actually occur.
His visions for the company, even 7 years ago, are definitely admirable and may be feasible, but they were obviously very lofty for the time and probably shouldn't have been leaked publicly. Anyone who dumped more shares based off those words alone, without tangible evidence, should be more to blame than him. He's been an environment-conscious junkie and entrepreneur for decades now - while I can't speak for him directly, I'm sure he's been pretty upset and embarrassed by himself that he too bought 100% into Rivera's process.
While I will never believe any future hype on here until I see actual results, I don't believe saying MG pumped the stock (especially in the manner Rivera legitimately did, who ended up suffering legal damages) isn't fair to Garjian's efforts for an actual change.
Let's be clear what's happened here in the last 12 months:
1. Garjian and his new team have legally broken away from Rivera's brand name once and for all. They will at some point release a new company name, but there really is no need to do it right now.
2. They are experimenting with old ideas and trying to manipulate them using 2014 advances in pyrolysis. If they were smart, they'd hire legitimate biochemists, chemical engineers, and R&D scientists to fund this effort. I have no idea who their current team comprises of.
3. Assuming there is something in the works, they are being extremely tight-lipped for a reason. This is how constructive and effective start-up companies SHOULD be operating - don't false alert the masses, work hard for many months, and wait until you get something tangible to address the public.
This mindset is clearly different from years past, and I'd say pre-emptive hype (like some people express on this forum) is very destructive and hindering to the actual players involved in attempting to make it work. Rivera tried to both synthesize the product and sell the product at the same time, and this clearly turned off any international entities that were open to funding it small-scale.
There's an inherent reason companies haven't created a cost-effective catalyst for biodegradable pyrolysis AND garnered enough funding domestically or internationally to get it in mass volume. These things take time, lots of money, tons of repetitive science, and access to resources that most companies give up on the effort.
I have no idea if MG or his team actually reads this forum, but it's pretty clear that they need a more robust effort from younger scientists willing to invest free part-time labor in helping them with this endeavor. They should be searching and reaching out PhDs college graduates in biochemistry, Masters students at notable universities, professors looking for a high reward side-project, and engineers who all can be compensated for company stock shares in place for some R&D.
Is this it for pyrolysis?
Does anyone have tangible information on the strides in biochar-formation in 2014? I know some of you are involved in the energy industry, at least for company valuation, stock-sharing, and just general interest. What technology exists now in the industry for the biofuel revolution to be possible? Surely there are new technological concepts today compared to the Rivera process, which is nearly a decade old. My guess on the catalytic process is this:
(1) Potency. Natural, degadable material can be broken down into small amounts of energy, but that produced oil isn't potent enough by itself, holds an insustainable reactant:product ratio, and yields sufficient amounts to compete with petroleum.
(2) Volume. A catalyst for spurring this biochar does not produce greater output - it simply speeds up the reaction.
(3) Trademark. The pyrolysis of feedstock from a catalyst isn't patentable by a single entity in the United States. Maybe there's international potential with another government?
Read up on free-fatty acid (FFA) conversion to create biofuel using a methanol catalyst. Promising, but production of canola oil biofuel using a chemical reagent is minimal.
http://www.biochar-international.org/node/1922
Chemistry buffs here are preferred here. What is the reason that a catalyst hasn't been formed yet for effective conversion?
Here's the reality.
There is no amazing process.
1. The fraudulent process outlined in the Rivera process was never patented successfully due to the SEC's lawsuit (and may have stole concepts from someone else). The new team right now basically let the old SSTP brand dissolve into revocation. Maybe a new brand will emerge.
2. The biofuel concept on the horizon takes pieces of the past Rivera process and combines some novel ideas to generate a catalyst for energy. But again, there is no patent or copyright process to be had, and it doesn't sound like an idea patentable by a single entity.
3. There are no outside ventures to fund this new project besides the limited self-funding from the team. Outside companies don't trust it.
Either way, this stock and this brand is toast until something substantial happens.
Your best bet on this message board is to stay off it, ignore hopeless unsubstantiated claims by posters who are blowing smoke (they know who they are), and personally hope that tangible improvements come by a new brand within the year.
The BabyHippos of the world are looking for that one "gotcha" moment in this stock where, by beating a dead horse for months upon months, they'll have their vindication moment to show everyone how much of a "blessing" it was to stay in it.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut here and there.
Being abstract and vague isn't tangible at all.
This stock is far from any tangible evidence. To say "I know something" and not provide any proof is just mere speculation and no better than a BabyHippo shout for false promises and hopes. We have Obama for that already.
You want tangible evidence? Only these things matter:
1. News press release on advances in technology, location, direction, or focus
2. Consistent share increases long-term (month, not weeks)
It's clear at this point that Rivera's SSTP brand is dissolved and that the new team involved is using their equity to explore alternate biochemical processes for catalyst (separate to the Rivera Process) to generate biodegradable fuel. However, it's pretty clear that (1) they don't have enough funding from domestic or international ventures or (2) they do not have a copyright patent on the process unique from other companies already exploring it.
Until those two conditions are changed, even a new effort is futile.
So what happened BH?
Where's the big day?
Can we all agree that BH is in clear Code of Conduct violation here by trolling the forum with a deceptive agenda? If this stock wasn't in revocation right now he'd be sucking in new investors who don't know SSTP's history.
Why would SSTP faithful trust you?
You signed up 3 months ago during the final pump and dump. You've been wrong making a positive spin day in and day out - all with no facts.
The general public deserves transparency.
BH is in clear violation of Code of Conduct rules outlined by this forum.
"A. Is unlawful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, libelous, vulgar, hateful, DECEPTIVE, fraudulent, invasive of another's privacy, tortious, contains explicit or graphic descriptions or accounts of sexual acts (including but not limited to sexual language of a violent or threatening nature directed at another individual or group of individuals), or otherwise violates our rules or policies;"
How can this be allowed? This stock is in trade revocation, nothing has changed website-wise, and this guy is spouting deceptive, fraudulent, unrealistic claims in a public form. Deceptive positivity should be just as egregious as deceptive negativity.
Read KingOil's pricing summary.
Clear pump and dump, similar to March 2013.
This stock never had anything meaningful to present with new ownership. Really disappointing, but it's the reality of fraudulent management, fraudulent product, misleading claims, and hype-masters like BabyHippo rallying the uninformed.
Not gloom and doom. Just facts.
People like BH are the type waiting for that grand "I told you so" moment in penny stocks - whether it be next week, 1 month, 1 year, or 5 years from now - where all of their untenable hype and speculation pays off to justify daily talking points opposite to facts.
Yes, desperate, deceitful salesmen exaggerate present negative circumstances.
BH: "I'm so excited for what's to come for you and this car!"
Us: "Dude, that car is awful. It barely runs, no one wants to drive it, its value is awful, and there is no official paperwork to document it."
BH: "... I'm excited for this car! Spring is blossoming! Be faithful! This car will win you over soon enough!"
Posting your hopes and dreams is detrimental to the realities of this company, its technology, and its future going forward.
You sound like a desperate used car salesman.
Having excitement and being realistic are completely different.
There is clearly nothing wrong with having excitement for a stock's future. I think the majority of investors are positive-minded people. I certainly am. But you have to be realistic when evaluating a stock short-term and long-term - and SSTP has been plunging both long-term and short-term.
To troll like a fool daily on this board when the SSTP stock has *clearly* shown negative trends opposite to your hype is not only extremely annoying, but deceitful. Just for reference in case anyone else is reading (which is probably really small in number), go ahead and read BH's posts since February - nothing but hyperbole and fallacy.
And really dude? Bringing up these realistic facts makes me "unfaithful to SSTP" and "in over your head"? What arrogance on your part. I will be happy to call you out for the remainder.
Again, just so people understand: there is nothing here in this SSTP company right NOW to be positive about, and it's simply the facts.
You created an alias 2 months ago... The same 2 months ago where the pump and dump happened and we should "all be excited for whats to come."
I've actually been involved in hundreds of penny stocks online for 15 years now, including ZEONS and SSTP since 2008. And yes, I decided to make a new alias today to tell you that what you're doing is a disservice to shareholders.
There's a complete difference between relaying optimism / enthusiasm and spewing blind, naive foolishness in the face of reality. What you're doing and saying is an embarrassment to investors on here who actually committed to SSTP for years and getting burnt along the way. I'm pretty sure if SSTP went to 0.00 right now you'd find a positive way to justify it. There is absolutely nothing good about SSTP's revockation with the SEC - and for you to keep posting this propaganda as a sign of "good things to come" is just plain embarrassing.
Oh, and you do?
Get real dude. No one buys what you're selling and you have zero credibility through your comments on this stock to understand what's going on. Most of us actually study stock trends, company profiles, management profiles, valuation, pump and dump behaviors, and volume deception. This stock can't even keep SEC paperwork, and there's nothing to stay tuned for with this company.
The very negligible rise in this stock over 60 days was exactly what someone else referenced to - a naked shorting of the stock as a one-time effect for shortterm, failing penny stocks.
Unless a new organization is formed from STTP with a novel biofuel mechanism that translates existing shareholders to the new company, this run is officially over. Stop posting.
BabyHippo needs a reality check.
I cannot believe how delusional, naive, and annoying this guy is on these boards. This stock is absolutely toast, and any small negligible changes in the stock's price was simply a pump-and-dump bolstered by figures within the company. In fact, people like BabyHippo are destructive to realistic stocktrading... really man, a morph from a caterpillar into a butterfly?
1. There has been zero press release on SSTP for years now.
2. There is zero information on any positive changes from the Rivera process, which was deemed fraudulent by the SEC, to suggest biofuel creation. If any move was made to utilize a catalyst with degradable material to create sustainable energy, there would already be progress from a penny fraction on this stock. In fact, the opposite has happened - there are no investing international or domestic venture companies willing to fund or contribute to this effort. There is nothing here.
3. Reality check for any people *possibly* buying into anything people like BabyHippo say: penny stocks that stay at 0.001-0.002 for years and cannot even fluctuate to a simply penny (0.01) tend to stay below a penny forever. If the SSTP company cannot find a way for this stock to even reach a penny, you can either be realistic and look to other ventures or keep your head in the clouds like BabyHippo, dreaming of a false narrative and hopes and dreams that are simply outrageous.
4. There is zero indication that this stock will rise out of SEC revokation. The stock can't even file proper and simple paperwork, either by ownership or otherwise, to keep its registration secure for simple investment. Also, the fact that ownership even let SSTP get to the point of dead paper-filing with the SEC shows that they nothing here to see for the public to invest in.
Give it up BabyHippo. Nobody wants to read your overtly enthusiastic propaganda.