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.
It's because every stock you support winds up being a scam. Every one. Don't care that the pump and dump sometimes results in a price spike, all of them wind up being scams. So you're either really bad at picking and evaluating stocks and companies, or you're just another pumper who happens to be able to string more sentences together than most.
What forces a company in bankruptcy to liquidate? If you understand bankruptcy and actually read through the proceedings yourself instead of letting the pumper con artists spoon feed you BS, you’d know. A company enters bankruptcy when they can’t service their debts, asking for protection from their creditors while they figure out what to do. This company was in a deep hole and when its stock tanked and it was delisted from the 2 exchanges, selling stock to cover that hole was no longer an option. So they entered bankruptcy/CCAA and solicited 80 other companies, some in the chemical business, some in finance, to see if any would help with capital and restructuring so they could stay in business. There were no bids to do that, so they were forced to liquidate and shut down. If you’re looking for the boogeyman, it would be the bankruptcy process, the court, or the creditors who essentially owned the assets with the liens they held on them, who forced the liquidation. The company had no choice at that point, there was nothing they could do to pay their debt and stay in business. The second bidding process resulted in the best bid for all the assets, $4.34 M, being accepted without objection from any creditor or anyone else. That was the end of any possibility of a payment made to the shareholders, despite the fairy tale told over and over here.
When a company in bankruptcy moves into liquidation, every asset that has value will be offered for sale in order to get as much money as possible to pay their creditors. By definition, they are not staying in business, and have no use for any of the assets.
There was 1 bid for just the intangible assets, and that bid was for $150k, though it appears that bidder didn't want them all. The only other bidders to include the intagibles were the 2 who bid on all three lots of assets. That is detailed on page 37 of the 6th monitor's report that you've refused to read.
https://www.pwc.com/ca/en/car/bioamber/assets2/bioamber-043_120718.pdf
You ignore facts.
The facts are the company was liquidated and shut down 5 years ago, not even a whisper from the company itself since. Why do you think that is?
The second dumbest assertion being made is that the BS about the buyout, the liquidation not being real, the company operating in secret, etc, must be true because there’s still people saying it isn’t. Such a textbook case of confirmation bias and denial.
They buy these scam stocks deep in the triple zeroes, then start pumping in a chorus about how great the company is, selling when the figure they’ve fooled everyone they can.
They’re flipping the stock, taking their profit. That’s the sole reason for this little pump.
If you'd ever read the court records, you'd know that ain't happening here.... the company is being liquidated by SELLING all of its assets. Then it is gone, shut down forever.
Is he planning to sell out?
I’ve been through the claims and the finances of this company numerous times, and it’s a scam. This time, it’s just a bunch of pumper con artists trying to get a flip off a triple zero stock, and nothing more.
This is a scam, has always been a scam, and will always be a scam. All that’s going on right now is there’s a group of trip flippers trying to pump up a quick buck.
The example you gave was irrelevant to what you said and irrelevant to this company.
Ok, must have left out the “may be” part in the post.
You said they were shorting, which means they are borrowing shares.
They can be audited and publish anything they want without inhabiting a scam OTC shell. They can open their books up to anyone desiring chicken feet that wants to see them....
All corporations are "beholden to laws and regulations," and if he were to have kept his equity ownership, he'd get to keep all the money for himself....
"Control" isn't equity ownership... and the article says that what's done is 2 of the companies were "acquired" (not mentioning any sort of consideration).
Sure, and everything these stinky pink companies put out is the whole truth....
/sarcasm
He can be as transparent as he wishes, doesn't need to inhabit a scam shell at all.
So, 6 years ago, an unrelated company in an unrelated industry was involved in a hostile takeover (which HUMBL isn't), and the hostile parties bought and sold stock while they were buying stock. And they sold stock in order to keep the PPS from going up so they could buy stock....?
Yeah, OK, sure, and that perfectly explains borrowing shares (with associated fees) to short sell while buying other shares....
That's a load of crap. He'd be handing over equity ownership of his "company" (heavy emphasis on the quotes) to a bunch of bagholders for nothing. No legitimate business does that, and it sure as hell isn't "cheaper" than retaining the 100% ownership that he has.
If he wanted a corporate structure, it is far better to make one, clean, rather than inhabit a scam and hand over equity ownership to the holders of nearly 5.5B bags. That would be a monumentally stupid business move to make.
It's a scam, and his rationalization of the "why" is BS.
Venture capitalists provide capital to businesses for growth and get equity, interest, or some other sort of return on their investment. They don't buy stock on the open market from other retail investors, they're just plain old retail investors when/if they do that, provides nothing to the company.
And "big players" buying stock and borrowing stock (with associated fees) to short would be stupid, especially for your suggested purpose of keeping the PPS down. If you think that's happening, seriously, look into CD's, still paying pretty good these days.
No, it isn't a good answer. Companies don't go public just to be public. They go public to gain access to the public stock markets/exchanges to sell stock and raise capital for their business (also gives the business owners a market/exchange to sell their equity ownership). If there's no need or plan to sell stock, there's no need to be public. Legitimate companies don't merge into scammy OTC shells and reward its bagholders with equity ownership in their legitimate company. That would be stupid.
That's the main reason all these RM's on the OTC are pure scams. If anything in this fairy tale were true, that the Chinese were so desperate for sugar and chicken feet and none of their normal sources had any, and they turned to a newb who'd never been in the business, a newb who, despite his financial troubles and debts, just happened to arrange the 10's or 100's of millions to fund the purchase and transportation from Brazil to China, (repeating myself) if all that were true, John Park would have zero need to merge into this perpetual scam of an OTC company. In fact, it would be a very bad move, and his "explanation" that it somehow lends credibility to his "company" is pure hogwash.
So, a “venture capitalist” is buying stock on the open market, and the big boys buy stock and short (ie - borrow and sell) at the same time?
You need to get an investment advisor.
That's a covering transaction for a block sale. They sell short from the block throughout the day, and when they're done buy (or sell) the block. Probably more dilution.
The termination of the deal was the last thing said about it, as a logical person would expect. The proxy was moot at that point, and especially when Isleworth decided to redeem the stock and wind up.
Is the only attention you get the responses to your fabricated delusions?
No they didn't say that. They said the deal was terminated.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/isleworth-and-cytovia-terminate-merger-agreement-301579200.html
Y'know the court records don't say jack about a 2nd transaction, but they do say all the assets were sold off except some unusable inventory and some office stuff. And doing a 2nd transaction without a corporate charter, board of directors, executives, employees, business operations, etc., would be kinda hard....
Tell me, how much is the buyer paying for the shares? Got a link to it? Is it more than the 15 cents per share when the stock was delisted? More than the 5 cents per share when the ticker was deleted? Why would anybody do that? Seems kinda dumb.
Nope, that isn't what they said. They were dissolved, no name change. They're gone completely.
It this the only attention you get, responses to your nonsense?
They did update it. They cancelled the business combination, and then Isleworth redeemed their stock and shut down. Wake up.
Yep. The 8K they published before withdrawing their appeal to NASDAQ says "liquidation and dissolution." This is already toast.
Can't really speak for Canada's tax laws. In the US, you can take the loss in the tax year that the stock became worthless (2019) without relinquishing the shares. Unfortunately, the 3 years have now passed for the opportunity to amend that tax return and do that.
Oh, and there are no short positions on this stock, any that existed when the ticker was deleted and CUSIP suspended were closed shortly thereafter by people who know how things work.
There you have it folks, a person who doesn't know how anything works pretending that they do....
I'll thank you for not changing my quote and then attributing it to me. It was "they just disappear from the person's account." What, exactly, do you think a transfer agent does, and especially if a company doesn't have one, who's going to record this "transaction" that the person who asked the question was talking about? Shares only become a piece of paper when the holder requests it, couldn't get one today if you tried for FKA BIOAQ since there's no transfer agent and no issuer (aka - the company doesn't exist with its corporate charter revoked, no business operations, no employees, let alone a board and executives), and if you did that, relinquishing them would be a bit harder. They're an electronic record, and without a transfer agent to track the transactions, if a holder asked his broker to remove them, they'd just disappear from his/her account.
CD's still pay a pretty good rate these days. I'd check on them if I were you.
There is no transfer agent for this company to record the event, so they just disappear from the person's account.
Your stock was issued by Immune, New Jersey, which is in bankruptcy.
Immune Nevada was a scam company that is now dissolved. They didn’t issue any stock whatsoever, so you don’t own any.
So, there’s nothing in the court records for any of your delusions, then?
Show anything from the bankruptcy court records after the chapter 7 conversion that shows anything other than a liquidation going on for Immune Pharmaceuticals or admit you just make things up that aren’t true.