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.
My guess is the selling is coming crom recent buyers that bought in based on charts/momentum on the big surge and had ZERO idea what they were buying. Since there was no big technical sell-off which would have alerted them to immediately dump, they kept holding. Eventually they realized there was not going to be another surge and just started unloading. That being said, someone bought a lot of shares BEFORE the Q3 #s and could not have thought there would be any real positive volume to dump into based on historical movements. That buying was real. Just another strange chapter in this trainwreck.
Doubt this would be tax loss selling. I think most long term losses wanting out would have gotten out on the spike to 4.
That 188K offer on the ASK is nefarious. Same block that was there constantly on the way down.
With the incredible spike on price/volume - mgmt is STILL out to lunch and nowhere to be seen/heard. This is and has remained the issue. ZERO confidence in the mgmt team/BOD with respect to how they view and treat shareholders.
Hopefully they didnt manage to f up the 4Q and show strong results on the 10K in March
So - what shares were liquidated...? Or - where has the non ending volume of shares the last two years+ been coming from?
Thanks for the update from the SH meeting. Unfortunately - I gave up on them. Ever since Lieberman and Castle hijacked rhe meetings and accused every outside shareholder of being a daytrader they became pointless. They neutered Ma
168 shareholders on record...? Thats just grasping at straws. Even the most rudimentary investors know that count only includes shares registered in individual's names and the vast majority of shares are registered in street/brokers names.
EECPFAN - I dont know how they liquidated without filing but as someone was trying to explain to me - it had to do with the way the trust/estate was probably set up and the distributions were made. As O'Brien pointed out - the estate is no longer listed as a majority owner which suggests the selling has been from the liquidation of the estate.
Whether or not they are or arent - bigger issue remains the company's complete refusal to address it. Heirs age over value or potential of the investment they inherited - fine. Makes sense they have to liquidate. But exec compensation has done nothing but increase at a ridiculous rate relative to bottom line results not to mention stock price. Again, not discussed by mgmt. They shot down shareholders in last CC they had that tried to discuss it. The cost cutting was critical but it ahould never have gotten to that point and they haven't committed to long term profitability.
Anyone attend the Chicago show VASO exhibited at last week?
$0.10/share gives a market cap of $2.2BB. Even with a rich valuation of 50x sales - that would be
$44MM in revenues. If they generate $10 per Actipatch (have no idea on gross revenue) - that would be 4.4MM units. Right now they are at what - 50K units? They will need very quick adoption and exponential sales to even approach those numbers. Not out of the realm by any stretch if they take off. Becomes much more likely if partnering with a CVS and they get the leverage of their retail exposure. But-that remains a long ways off. We have posters waiting for 6s or 5s. Those are traders. PPS needs more lomg term investors for stability whilw thw traders flip it upwards if/when sales start to go exponential.
No problem. Unfortunately I am heavily invested and was very pro EECP. I watched them waste a ton of money on the Dempsey buyback and then squander money with M&A activity that was supoosed to be accretive and topped off with the Netwolves fiasco which looked like a very bad inside job so I am not exactly confident that they will turn it around.
However, if they DO successfuly integrate the software side with the hardware side and use Netwolves infrastructure to market the new company - then it could be a very profitable company. The bloat and reluctance to honestly deal with shareholders though makes me suspect at best.
I dont think its a matter of keeping it down vs just wanting to liquidate. Heirs will naturally disagree on the value of such a speculative stock and they may not agree how/when so they just agree to liquidate holding and divvy up proceeds. Each of the brothers owned 35-40MM shares and there are 165MM outstanding so liquidating roughly 1/3 will keep a thinly stock down for a long time. Especially when mgmt is doing nothing to enhance shareholder value.
Now - MMs KNOWING there is a shittonne of stock to be sold on program selling may play games with PPS and small trades to try and get more shares cheaper/faster or it could be institutional investors playing same games hedging that the end of the selling is near. That would be a reasonable explanation.
More about liability. If there is a major adverse effect during clinical trials/early adoption - it cuts MUCH deeper with a major pharma that has earnings/assets vs a company struggling to survive. Once established - big Pharma can leverage their distribution agreements/supply chain to drive down mfg costs and ramp up adoption. They will pay a premium on the back end to protect (minimize)themselves from liability on the front end. Thank the bottom dweller attorneys for that reality and your elected officials tht REFUSE to discuss, let alone pass, real tort reform. Still one of the biggest costs/barriers to entry in medical field (nd mfg in general).
What is the wholesale price of one of those 22K units to Mundi? Did they annonce this deal previously?
I havent looked at shareholder % in awhile but didnt the Whalens own over 50% of outstanding stock/voting shares? If so - they dont require a "shareholder" vote to appoint a new CEO. Just like Facebook doesnt need to based on their share structure.
Like filing 2016 #s at the beginning of 2018 and saying they would be caught up soon? Or finally reporting revenues with enough guidance to suggest they would continue? Unfortunate thing for me is I knew rhe tech was legit - not the company. I was "fortunate " to get in long after PPS collapsed. Thought they had turned the corner. Definitely strung investors along with just enough to give to the illusion of being legit
Until the one Sybrnick estate is done selling - it is going to remain under selling pressure. Company should have made those SG&A cuts seceral years ago. They abandoned EECP and purchased the dead weight Netwolves which was supposed to be accretive. Burned through $15MM in cash with nothng but unprofitable revenues to show for it. Investors are NOT convinced the changes are real or selling is over. Would agree daytradera are in control.
I agree. Intital price point is critical for long term success and large scale market exposure is not positive if it sets a price point in the consumers' mind that is not attractive long term to the company. As a small, struggling/emerging company, they have very limited leverage negotiating with a CVS (or any other major retailer). Their best leverage IS walking away and forcing CVS to come back with a better offer or risk a competitor getting an exclusive rights agreement before them and losing access to the product. Without knowing anything about the negotiations or what was ultimately offered, it is difficult at best to say whether it was good or bad. Did they have competing offers? Late stage negotiations with other retailers? Would they increase their negotiating position with these new approvals? Lot of ifs.
Mgmt group is the largest stockholder group and has the most to gain (and lose) in signing a bad or limited deal. That doesn't mean ego cant get in the way but it usually is a good motivator.
The fact CVS got that far with ghe company gives credence to the viability of the product in the market place and that alone makes the company attractive from a risk/reward standpoint.
I have been a shareholder probably going on 2 years and bought the vast majority of my shares once it dipped past 0.001. It has been in a trading range between 6-9 for awhile. To me, it looks like a transfer from investors moving on to new/existing investors accumulating.
Sharpei - I dont have a solid history of timelines/PRs that would establish the trend of misinformation that could have been used to defraud shareholders. Hiwever, I can help wordsmythe it. After any group working on it is satisfied - it should be posted on here so all can copy and paste it into their own complaint. All individual complaints should state the actual losses (paper or real) suffered. Succinct but pointed is key. Numerous shareholders filing complaints with definitie losses/damages will give more weight for the SEC to investigate.
In terms of old players being in different corporations - fraud, securities violations, etc easily pierce the corporate shield when it comes to liability and provides no protection when it comes to criminal activity. Now - collection always is an issue but if the SEC recommends action and AG prosecutes - civil action and collection becomes easier.
You can send to me at thesmalls at yahoo . I can help word it-fill in blanks eith my experience in the company
rclarke - the simplest and most damning thing is the complete breach of fidcluciary responsibility. The BOD and upper mgmt are officers in a public company to specifically PREVENT shareholders from getting fleeced. The "tortured language" in the filings in essence telling shareholders not to trust mgmt does NOT negate the underying breach of responsibility. Tht is why the fiduciary exists. In civil court - one only has to be 51% right to win. Completely different than criminal.
Shapei - if those folks have 700-900MM shares - surely they are pissed and have the financial means to have the conversation with the attorney. Not liking them is not a reason to be bent over. If nothing else - every shareholder should be filing a complaint with the SEC and using those in mgmt as examples of fraud/deceipt in their shareholder letters, public releases, etc. As an example - WHAT were they doing to get current on filings early in 2018 when they committed to it. If they cant show anything to back that up - it is fraudlent. Furthermore - the pattern established certainly could meet the threshold for material breach which is actionable in civil court when fraud is involved. Imcompetence is somewhat protected but fraud is not.
Mgmt remains out to lunch and hostile towards shareholders. Not ironically, they blame pissed off and frustrated shareholders for their lack of communication.
Peter Castle let Netwolves go in the tank and then orchestrated a private takeover for pennies on the dollar before unloading that to Vaso for a hefty payout. Ma said several.times that deal was accretive (as well as the rest of their acquisitions). Yet, they have lost money every quarter since and the GEHC division has been the ONLY sector to actually make money.
Another huge selloff at multi year lows and mgmt is once again silent.
If he is going to do something for the shareholders-he better do it immediately. The easiest, non cost option would be to put out a statement to all shareholders. They havent even bothered to do that since they suckered a bunch in filing the 2016 10K beginning of last year and committing to being fully updated "soon."
That is where one should start with any civil suit/fraud action. Make them justify those public comments and prove internal activity that was completed to back that up.
Not much different between yesterday and two months ago. There was no BID even ifbone wanted to sell. Either way - brojer needs to be involved to get liquidated for tax purposes.
The SEC is rather useless here. How does this "protect" shareholders? Why not make the principals personally liable when they become deliquent? Even if filing for more time at least it allows shareholders some "information." Why does the SEC not "advocate" for shareholders and force principals like this to go beforw an inquiry to defend their lack of actions? Many ways to to eliminate the OTC scams but they realistically have little interest in dojg so. Job security.
thats the thing about lawsuits most people dont understand. they are expensive by design and geared towards the attorneys. it is a coordinated dance to extract as many fees/billable hours as possible. and if you DO win - there are more fees, time, headaches and costs to actually COLLECT assuming the entity that loss IS collectable. the scams run on pink sheets and OTCs all understand these metrics implicitly as well as knowing they can skirt around the edges of the SEC with respect to manipulation/fiduciary responsibility as long as they do not be come "too big" and risk being made an example out of. so - these scams are relatively easy to create and perpetuate.
now - is HCTI a scam? getting harder and harder argue the company did NOT intentionally mislead investors and keep "hope alive" while diverting funds, monies, assets, resources for self serving interests. i have commented before on here - just because you tell investors in a filing there are competing interests/biases in your actions does NOT relieve officers from basic fiduciary responsibilities of protecting/enhancing shareholder value. you cant tell someone before you robbed them that you are going to and then tell the judge at trial they were given full notice ahead of time. if shareholders DO believe they have been manipulated - first thing to do is file a report with the SEC and provide a detailed summary of the claims the company made, conflicting information/reports, apparent manipulation that occurred, and current paper losses. the more losses associated with an individual company/officer - the higher profile it becomes for the enforcement division to investigate and follow up. they have limited resources and time like everyone else so they go after the bigger fish hard and heavy to make an example out of them to deter everyone else. every once in awhile, they will take out small guys as well just to try and further deter those who think they arent high profile enough.
at this point, there is nothing the company is doing to show it is a functioning company or aligned with the shareholders. that in of itself is actionable as a civil complaint. if they are legit and just not dedicating time to keeping shareholders informed - those holding 5BB shares as a group should have a heart to heart with them and let them know the masses are clanging on the gates outside. it does the company nor shareholders any good for the company to waste MORE time and money fighting lawsuits/responding to SEC inquiries if they are legit and just not focused on that side of the business. it IS imperative to keep shareholders involved/up to date.
Not for management. They again did VERY well while the shareholders got kicked inthe groin (again). SG&A remains horribly bloated and STILL increased though only "less than 1%."
Cash is now down to $2MM. What was it before Netwolves acquisiton...? $13-15MM? Didnt Ma tell us the Netwolves acquisiton would be accretive? What happened? Just like Mobicare, Biox and the rest.
Still ZERO mention of the stock price in PR. They quit doing CCa after the quarterly because they never had an answer for that. Instead, they blamed the unrest on stock flippers. Bunch of BS.
Sorry - I meant Joshua instead of Simon.
My understandung of thw corproate governance around estates and transferring of shares is suspect at best but how it was explained to me the survivors of the estate could liquidatetheir holdings individully without being subject to being an insider/5% rule assuming they individually did not inherit more than 5%. It is murky at best. Tht being said, there has been undeniable, systematic liquidation for years since they have passed. Dempsey had the $6MM payoff disguised as a stock buyback but those shares would have been absorbed years ago. The current insiders havent filed Form 4s. So - where could that many shares be coming from...? Unfortunately, I have over 1MM reasons to hope your scenario is correct (Simons interests lining up perfectly with common shareholders). However, if that is the case nd he is a saavy businessman- WTF is he allowing his company to be systematically robbed through ridiculously bloated SG&A and get the virtually same summary quarter after quarter...? Why does he not clean house and remove the pigs from the trough?
The company generates enough cash to pay salaries and bonuses and thts it. Every acquisition they made they claimed was accretive. Yet, they havent made money from since 2013(?). Netwolves brought revenue but still isnt producing earnings. When are those synergies supposed to bear fruit?
I would love to go back to being positive but I just am not seeing it. Why would Simon let this continue with his ownership/control? He makes very little as a BOD member vs what his stock could be worth. What gives...?!
There are a lot of longs that have been holding since the 30s, 20s, and teens that believed the company. The only thing that makes sense on the volume/blocks for sales is the late Syrbnik estate liquidating positions. Only positions large enough to keep selling for that long and that systematic. Its possible the selling is finally coming to a close and MMs are rearranging rhe deck chairs.
Next question is who is buying. The average daytrader/swingtrader simply cant afford to tie up that much cash on a stock with the history VASO has had last 4 years. That suggests a more motivated buyer with a lomger term hirizon. Possibly someone that is being fed more info than the shareholders at large.
Or - could just be more manipulation to suggest the end is near and bring in new buyers to keep dumping. The Netwolves mgmt tanked that company and then took it private. Same trend could be argued here.
Whatever it is/was - hard not to believe it isnt being manipulated. 300MM shares back on the ASK at 1.
Wish I didnt get that 1st hand report from their trade show booth in Indy several years back.
#sh1tshow
Thank you but Im no expert. I substantially increased my position after they released 2016 financials and committed to get current early last year. Im still baffled why they spent the money for auditing results if they had no intention of following through. If it was to allow friendlies a means to get out with the volume surge - it worked.
If I was in the accumulation phase - wait for ASK to repopulate with a bunch of 1s anf take them all at once. Those that have been waiting around for a long time might start thinking "this could be my last chance to get out" and will be more inclined to put up their shares at 1 after a prolonged period.
The rate at which the 1s keep slamming the ASK is compelling and odd as fhe way they are taken in one fell swoop periodically after they rebuild. Could be just the mindgames to rope the masses in to create a real run. Play the 1s back and forth between yourself (group) until you have ypur position established and then all hit the 2s creating the psychological surge.
Few things straightforward in the OTC world.
And just like that, within an hour, BID goes from 70MM on BID at 1 to 70MM on ASK at 1.
Will buyer come back and scoop those up or will we wait another month?
I certainly thought of unloading 70MM shares when I saw that BID this morming. Its gone now. Plenty of shareholders feel the same way I do. Flip side-someone just dropped $16K buying those shares. Thats real money. Not someone throwing a $100 at it and hoping to turn it into $100K
If they are buying any appreciable amount of shares/float-they would need to report. With their connection to HCTI, they would certainly be flirting around the edges of insider trading AT BEST if buying any and not reporting. With minimal enforcement by SEC in this realm - risk/reward is attractive.
Those reports are useless and aliases mean nothing. Every time someone misspells your name on a loan app, credit report, rent agremeent, etc you get a new alias and when you have a foreign name like that - it is bound to be misspelled. I have one speeding ticket in my entire life and I have morenaliases than he due to my name and siblings.
However, what has triggered buying this morning? We have seen this several times osince beginning of the year. BID vack up over 60MM. Stock continues to be a mindf*ck.
Is there an email address that Tecco responds/corresponds directly to investors?
I certainly could have worded that better or provided more context in terms of definitions of insiders, trading windows,and filing as an insider. However, I wasnt taking the hypothetical that seriously as he would be better served renaining with the company and using open windows to acquire the shares and not be subject to scrutiny while also remaining in a position to be able to exert some control over the ability for those shares to appreciate.
Doesnt matter - he still had access to the inside information and thus is considered an insider with respect to trading on that information. But, since you are speculating, if he quit to buy on the market and doesnt FLIP (holds longer term) then the information ontained as an insider would be public (theoretically) and he would no longer be considered to habe information that gave him an advantage.
I bought back in afger selling out on last 10Q. Im not convinced they will pull this off and consider this more of a short term trade vs long term investment. The way the communication (or lack thereof) with the bridge loans and the ensuing toxic loans made me sell. Until there is something concrete on the financing side, it will be difficult for me to hold this long term (again). I think there are many in the same boat that have purchased several million in this range for a momentum trade that were previously longs. Hopefully for the dedicated longs, this is finally ypur turnaround. EXIT relationship certainly looks promising but capital remains a major hurdle. So far-PGUS hasnt addressed that side.
Would be a lot more excited about the news if they tied some short term numbers to it and/or announced closing of bridge loan to make this happen. However, how do they execute a sales agreement with that type of organization without some assurances? Unless part of the agreement is if $PGUS defaults the property goes to EXIT Corp. The wording is specific on "launch and lead" so hopefully $PGUS finally has turned it around.
Doesnt help that MAXM showed back up and parked on the ASK
If mgmt didnt operate in a vacuum there wouldn't be so much discontent and wolves waiting at the door when material questions arise. That is squarely on them. If they feel sbareholders have turned on them - they should quickly address them/us on a fundamental level. Also good to see several willing to pursue civil action should this end up being another OTC shltshow.
One absolutely not use and Lynch or Buffett principles on Subpenny OTC stocks - specifically when toxic debt is involved (or any debt of last resort). Even the best ideas and managed companies in this realm are ALWAYS facing an uphill battle with capitalization. They can be shorted out of business or shorted into convertible debt by bad actors. Happens all the time. Many examples at sec.org.
Need acquisition update. Need current filings. Need a positive revenue stream in those acquisitions with a clear path to profitability.
Agreed. Has happened several times in past 12 months and then smacked hard. But amount at 2 has been decreasing while the 1s increase.
Can someone explain to me what the bid from ETRF is doing or why?
It keeps going from 5.7MM to 10.7MM to 15.7MM, to 20.7MM to 25.7MM and then back down in same order. Then repeats. Never have seen that type of activity from a MM. This cycle can do this with 20-30 sec
I agree that any talk of sjing is premature as we DONT know what is going on and that really isnt much different than it has been the last year or two. However, IF they pull the rug, those are the options available. The breach of fiduciary responsibility here in such a case would be rather blatant as they have responsibility to all - not just some or one side or the other. Having "different interests" in mgmt with two separate companies does not give license to breach that responsibility. Also, if suing, one needs to be very clear on motive: recovery, punishment, revenge, etc. If recovery - is there anything left to recover? Revenge - if tbey arent a moral person, revenge will be tough to enact. Punishment - that is best left for the SEC though they tend to pick and choose cases based on maximum exposure of judgments - think Martha Stewart. What she did was clearly illegal and sbe was probably generally unaware of the severity and it pales in comparison to what dirty MMs and shell companies do everyday. HOWEVER, that suit and verdict got MAJOR press and put the fear of god into everyday celebrities, athletes, etc about insider trading. So - maximum exposure. What exposure would this case provide...? Probably little unless losses were in tbe hundred of millions.
The company could erase doubt or this type discussion by simply opening up communication and transparency.