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.
I never thought you were smart and now you're just continuing to confirm it for all to see.
Your assumption that somehow I lost, am losing, or will lose money because I bought (Past tense) and currently hold (present tense) SHMP, is a hasty generalization, an unreasonable leap of logic. It fails to take into account any scenario other than the one you participated in just recently: YOLOing into SHMP on the claim it was going to go up, only to claim you "sold quickly" and didn't lose any money during the precipitous drop the next day.
Not all of us act in such irresponsible and stupid ways, right Baid?
Ex.: petulant🤡
Reading comprehension, my friend. It is not your strong suit. Go back and re-read what I said, then try again.
The Amended Joint Motion spells it all out.
"Did Easterling convert his Series A shares via the Shover Settlement."
This question is a non sequitur; it conflates dinstnictly separate factual and legal issues. It's premised on ignorance of facts and law. As I've stated numerous times, it is my view that the conversion occurred as a matter of law upon the Court's allowance of the Joint Motion. See the select quote below and the accounting on Page 5 of the link to the requisite 10Q.
"Gary Shover
A shareholder of NaturalShrimp Holdings, Inc. (“NSH”), Gary Shover, filed suit against the Company on August 11, 2020 in the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, alleging breach of contract for the Company’s failure to exchange common shares of the Company for shares Mr. Shover owns in NSH.
On November 15, 2021, a hearing was held before the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division at which time Mr. Shover and the Company presented arguments as to why the Court should approve a joint motion for settlement. After considering the argument of counsel and taking questions from those NSH Shareholders who were present through video conferencing link, the Court approved the motion of the parties to allow Mr. Shover and all like and similarly situated NSH Shareholders to exchange each share of NSH held by a NSH Shareholder for a share of the Company. A final Order was signed on December 6, 2021 and the case was closed by an Order of the Court of the same date. The Company is to issue approximately 93 million shares in settlement, which has been recognized as stock payable on the company's balance sheet, and its fair value of $29,388,000, based on the market value of the Company’s common shares of $0.316 on the date the case was closed, has been recognized in the Company's statement of operations as legal settlement."
https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/0001465470/000165495422001772/shmp_10q.htm
Clearly, the more precise, accurate and correct questions are: Did Easterling claim his 5,986,667 shares of NSI common stock?
Do the Series A shares retain legal effect post conversion?
Just looked at YOTA's most recent filings... looks like they're doing amazing.
"Which still has not resulted in a working prototype that can produce shrimp on a consistent basis at a cost that demonstrates economic viability."
This is a conclusory statement of opinion, not fact.
"Continue limited production (Agreed). Which proves nothing."
It proves the first comment is in fact an opinion and not a factual statement.
See EQ, you have an expectation about where, what and how the company should perform now, built on the selective data points YOU believe, think, feel, (whatever it might be), are most important. Not everyone agrees with or holds your same expectations. For some reason, you can't sit with that. Consequently, as I've shown above, your chosen method of debate and discourse is to frame your rhetoric and subjective opinion as incontrovertible fact, and that my friend suggests the allegations you levy at others ("attempting to influence folks into buying SHMP") are clearly subconscious projections of your own actual intent here. Stay classy.
I can't answer those questions for you.
Whether something is a "good investment" is personal to you. Each individual should seek professional advice to determine what is a "good investment" for them, inclusive of how long to tie up their capital.
No one on this board is giving professional advice specific to you; don't listen to anyone, myself included. Make decisions for yourself based on your own personal risk tolerance.
There you go assuming again. When I need to think irrationally and illogically, I'll find your class.
Yes, let your personal biases guide you.
Trading and investing are two different things, son.
Have I bought SHMP, yes.
Do I currently hold SHMP, yes.
Do those facts support your conclusion? No.
Logic is not your strong suit. You'd rather just speculate and make unsubstantiated allegations.
"The relationship with Thai Union 'strained' Red Lobster's supply chain, and Kenny circumvented his company's normal buying processes, Tibus said. Kenny axed two shrimp suppliers 'in apparent coordination with Thai Union and under the guise of a 'quality review,'"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/red-lobster-bought-a-lot-of-shrimp-from-its-thai-owner-now-the-new-ceo-is-investigating/ar-BB1mMDeW
"The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, industry headwinds, high interest rates and growing labor and operational costs caused Red Lobster to exert sustained negative pressure on Thai Union’s finances."
https://www.restaurantdive.com/news/thai-union-expects-divestment-red-lobster-end-2024/715752/
An NSI competitor in dire financial straits engaging in anti competitive behavior... nothing to see here.
"Your point is absurd as always."
"Are you making a point that SHMP would be their supplier."
What's absurd is stating that a point is absurd AND THEN ASKING what the point was.
Also, please do tell what I've been "wrong" about for three years. Please.
I am not going to explain something so obvious.
You tell me who is going to fill in for Red Lobster to purchase Thai Union's production and then I'll engage in this discourse.
What does an NSI competitor have to do with NSI? Are you serious? Of course you're not serious. No one takes you serious.
Red Lobster filed bankruptcy. $0 endless shrimp cost it $11m but the chain's owner, Thai seafood firm, Thai Union, may have used endless shrimp to dump its own shrimp supply through the 578 restaurants in North America. Thai Union is the only Red Lobster shrimp vendor, overcharging for shrimp and skipping quality reviews. See 6:24-bk-02486-GER, Doc 6, pages 16-17.
"they aren't tying up $2.5 million in cash to short $9,000 in stock." Maybe we grew up in a different time, among a different species, on a different planet. If that kind of money can tank the stock of a company developing an industry disuptive technology, then it would be a no brainer for "tradagro" / "Big Seafood," established industry players to try to nip this problem in the bud. It's peanutes. There is a track record for this. Your naivete is concerning.
Educate yourself: https://www.prsa.org/docs/default-source/home-library/professional-development/resource-pages/misinformation/short-seller-attacks---case-studies-(anonymized).pdf
Ever call every brokerage house in the country to confirm none will lend OTC shares? I'm going to venture a guess at "no," since it would be a futile act considering Short INTEREST is reported to FINRA as open for NSI, an OTC stock. Not once have you provided a reasonable explanation for why FINRA reports open short INTEREST on NSI. Who is doing it is irrelevant, but leave it to you to spot the wrong issue, as usual.
Like clockwork. Crappy take is refuted by hard evidence and the result is ad hominem attacks. So predictable.
I'm a nitpicker so I have to comment. The Court affirmed Series A creation in the Shover Suit. Therefore, your hypothetical lawsuit would fail. To that point, to say the Series A were "illegally issued" is legally incorrect. Anyone who read the Judge's Order can easily see that. However, the Court did not expressly state that in resolving the NSI-NSH "dispute" that the Series A would be cancelled. In my opinion, that is the only logical conclusion. On this board, this is THE issue.
To some extent we agree. However, it is my personal opinion that upon settlement of ALL NSH Shareholder claims, the Series A became void or null because of a lack of consideration. Consequently, it is my position that the Series A, currently, are without legal authority, standing, enforceability, etc., which means, I argue, they should be cancelled immediately, regardless of and certainly not contingent upon an uplist.
Now, with that said, I'll stir the pot... just because I think that's what should happen doesn't necessarily mean I disagree with what is happening...doesn't mean I agree either.
Your circuitous and long winded response = no, the number of preferred shares is not altered. How does that make it a trick question?
You tell me. Would they R/S at all?
I found this: "If the amendment effectuating the Reverse Stock Split has not been filed with the Secretary of State of Nevada by the end of the 12-month period from the Effective Consent Date, the Board will abandon the Reverse Stock Split." I think you understood it properly.
There was an expiration date on the filing? I must have missed that.
We all know that 1:25 RS is still on the table... before anything else need occur for any hypothetical uplist.
1.4 b to 56 m
.01 to $.25
I think you may be conflating operating expenses with costs of goods sold.
I've asked before and no one answered seriously, what COGS are different for NSI than a biofloc RAS Shrimp farmer?
Maybe, if you wanted to be taken seriously, you could have made yourself known in a more personable way. Call me crazy, but I don't start insulting people because of sour grapes when I first enter a room.
Who's deflecting now? I articulate how it's market forces and you don't want to engage. Classic UD.
I'm questioning you because you have no verifiable credibility to form such an opinion. Either you are someone whose been on this board and changed aliases, or you're a buddy of one of the egos here and they told you what to say. Seems like we got a bunch of boiler room wannabes.
https://ir.naturalshrimp.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/122/naturalshrimp-provides-platform-technology-update
How many tanks does one EC operate and not all EC units were for Lacoste or Iowa. During and after this time NSI also had PL supply issues.
These are supply-side issues (hence market), not NSI "tech" issues.
I forgot, do EC's require electronics, including processors? Please, UD, remind me.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/chip-shortage
Literally only one (1) year ago, but sure, let's go with "years"
https://www.npr.org/2023/04/11/1169191865/biden-ends-covid-national-emergency
It's odd how you're brand new and questioning NSI and UF in the same fashion as other egos on this board.
Says the stranger with an alias born and all 5 posts occuring TODAY. Even if I agreed with you, what context, perspective and experience do you have to make such a remark?
Guess COVID never happened in Josh Taeger's world.
which ones differ from a biofloc farm?
Please itemize the costs included in your $54.00 opinion.
Thank you.