I agree that having Keen still around is a good thing, as he is heavily invested in CRTG, and as far as I'm aware didn't directly benefit from the merger. One thought I'll throw out there, is if current management wanted to roll Coretec up into the battery company, it wouldn't cost them much to buy us all out and take it private. This could be one reason for the silence... they wouldn't want the stock to run up. I'm not basing this on anything; just throwing it out there.

...and durability of the anode over time, as it stands up better physically to the repeated expansion/contraction cycles.

I still wonder how they're going to make room in the approved share count for the conversions and dumping to commence? Hopefully we gain some clarity into the leadership's thoughts on this. I agree that there could be a huge amount of downward pressure on the stock that will rear its head after every few ticks upward, should this stock ever start to generate upward momentum. All we can do is hope for the best at this point. We don't even really know enough to engage in any real data-based speculation. GLTA

Companies generally don't institute a dividend until they've reached a stage of very mature growth, and they have ample, recurring cash flow to cover that obligation. As long as a company is in their growth phase they are pouring their profit back into investments like continuing/expanding R&D, or capital assets that increase production capacity, increase quality, or decrease continuing O&M. CRTG is a very long way from paying any sort of dividend, but maybe someday.

I don't see how any of those points you make would impact CRTG's decision on whether or not to enact a RS. At some point, they will need capital to grow. Do they issue more shares? Do they try to borrow? How do you believe they raise capital? Do you believe their revenue and profits continue to grow without expenditure for growth?

I'm curious what your rationale is, Driver. Why do you highly doubt that the leadership team would execute a 100 to 1 RS? What would the downside of that be to the new company management?

I would anticipate some further upward movement after the official closing, but I do not believe it will be anything like some here seemed to be expecting. Personally hoping for a little 300-400% pop in the days after the merger closes, and then hopefully they can follow the closing with some good news to drive another pop from there...we'll see. Hopefully my expectations are pessimistic and we all get a nice surprise. I just don't see where all the new investors are going to come from, and this still won't be on the radar for any institutional investors even after the close.

Perhaps (hopefully) where we might differentiate is in how our method mitigates the expansion/contraction degradation during the charge/discharge cycling.

I have felt for quite a while that whatever they're paying Fischbowl or Fischtank (or whatever their marketing contractor's name is) is too much. "Lackluster" would be too generous IMO. Hopefully marketing gets stronger post-merger... social media is an extremely cheap marketing medium to use.

We are all aware that reverse splits generally do not apply to preferred shares, right? Not trying to be negative, but I feel some here may not understand that this new board can enact a R/S that would only effect current common shares.... then they can convert their preferred shares to common....after that R/S.

I shared my thoughts a while ago, QS. Last lifeline is what this sounded like to me. It may yet work out, but a desperate act of a desperate group of executives looking to get something.... anything... for the time and effort they put in. Better than an immediate roll to 0, but CoreOptics got everything, and got paid to take it.

All those batteries will be replaced during the lives of all those EVs currently out there, yes. They don't last forever and degrade in every measure of performance with time and wear. It doesn't matter who the manufacturer is or what type of vehicle. The batteries will eventually degrade.

I wonder whatever happened to TWA Flyer? I noticed they stopped posting about CRTG on Yahoo a while ago, too. I miss the random, bearish, aimless-stream-of-thought comments based on nothing related to the real world.

Not sure that was my exact quote or not, but I maintain that outlook. We're all here to make money. So are they.

If I read that 8k right, we are issuing shares to compensate for the outstanding balance due to DAF? That would be quite a few shares at today's price. Hopefully I am misinterpreting that.

Looks as though Siar made a good choice. Revenue substantially lower than I even feared.... company valuation not anywhere near where some here were thinking it might be. .0164 as I type this. Siar could likely buy back in right now, same number of shares sold, and still walk away with a few extra dollars.

In case anybody wants a little more color on the charging station program issues:

https://www.americanenergyalliance.org/2024/06/biden-spends-7-5-billion-for-7-ev-charging-stations/

I personally get frustrated with federal government programs, and the glacial pace at which they progress, but, in some cases, they can make some things happen that wouldn't happen otherwise. Businesses weren't going to build out a public highway infrastructure, for instance, or provide a service such as what the FAA provides. While I rarely take time to appreciate these things, that doesn't make them less real and less impactful in the long term.

https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/assets/initialguide.pdf

All I can find on Nasdaq listing requirements is a requirement for 1.25M shares outstanding....not 500M. There is a market cap requirement.... maybe that is $500M, but whoever quoted the shares outstanding figure may want to revisit their source.

"Multiples of dollars PPS"? Bold prediction, Walrus. If that happens, prior to a RS, I'll take you out for a nice steak dinner here in OKC. You pick the place.

They (Coretec) have had an ongoing, on again/ off again relationship in using them for advertising/PR (hype generation).

Just the official announcement drives out quite a few of your base investors. That initial negative momentum is what feeds the real shorts. This one will be interesting to watch. How draconian will the ultimate RS be? I know some here feel there doesn't have to be one at all. It will be interesting to watch it play out. I think the revenue will be skinnier than many here are projecting, and the increase in share count will make an RS inevitable, especially if the new leadership is serious about uplisting, and also if they want a more responsible means of raising future capital for growth than issuing more new shares...i.e. become a real company with real growth plans.... you know... an actual investment instead of a speculative IP lottery ticket.

I think what she was alluding to over on Twits was that the RS might happen AFTER the additional shares are issued to the Core Optics team post-merger. Pessimistically, I don't think that's the greediest scenario for that group, so I think the RS will happen post merger, but before those additional shares come into play. Hopefully the stock does hit dollar land or close to it organically post merger prior to any potential RS announcement, and prior to those additional shares for the original CoreOptics team coming into play. This would provide a good exit point for those of us with hundreds of thousands or millions of shares to realize an extraordinary gain prior to the RS happening and wiping us out. I am planning on the CoreOptics team to act in their own best interest, which is not in line with ours, necessarily.... certainly not in the short to medium time range. Good luck being against their greed if that is your plan. I personally will be looking for a good exit point post merger and post revenue announcement, and hopefully I have enough time to do that prior to announcement of RS.

If you're talking about the green swirl, I believe that is Nvidia.

Yes, the bids and asks on limit orders are viewable. Your limit order at .004 would only get filled if somebody sells at that price, or if the market price dropped to that point and stayed for a bit.

The SEC definitely has a role to play in approving most, if not all, mergers involving public companies. The S-4 form we are all waiting to see marking merger approval is an SEC form.

Indirect info regarding the possible headwinds re: merger:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/minhnle_looking-forward-to-sec-approval-and-future-activity-7183205698384601089-brUR?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android

These (hopefully) will all be metrics unlocked post-merger. We will actually know something then: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/enterprisevalue.asp

EV is a very important metric, because it unlocks some other ratios that account for fundamentals.

Possibly an interesting post from Michelle Tokarz:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/michelle-tokarz-8908a814_another-successful-customer-discovery-program-activity-7182118635224670210-5Y5I?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android

Hopefully she's talking about working the business and manufacturing model for Endurion. Interesting names amongst the "likes" and comments.

We will see a S-4 filing when the merger becomes official.

In case you don't like links:

Menu

IFRS
IFRS 3 - Reverse acquisitions explained
Sarah Carroll
By: Sarah Carroll
19 Jan 20226 min read


Acquisitions of businesses can take many forms and can have a fundamental impact on the acquirer’s operations, resources and strategies. But what is a reverse acquisition and how do you account for it?
CONTENTS
What is a reverse acquisition?
Is the reverse acquisition transaction a business combination?
Identifying the acquirer
What is a business?
How to account for a reverse acquisition
How we can help
Our ‘Insights into IFRS 3’ series summarises the key areas of the Standard, highlighting aspects that are challenging to interpret and apply in practice. This article follows on from our published article ‘Insights into IFRS 3 – Identifying the acquirer’ and presents guidance for an area which is difficult in practice – reverse acquisitions.

Reverse acquisitions explained
Our ‘Insights into IFRS 3’ series summarises the key areas of the Standard. Download the full article or read on for more information.

Download PDF
What is a reverse acquisition?
A reverse acquisition occurs when an entity that issues securities (the legal parent or the legal acquirer) is identified as the accounting acquiree, and accordingly, the legal subsidiary (or the legal acquiree) is identified as the accounting acquirer.

One situation in which reverse acquisitions often arise is when a private operating entity wants a fast-track to a public listing. To accomplish this, the private entity arranges for its equity interests to be acquired by a smaller, publicly listed entity. The listed entity carries out the acquisition by issuing shares to the shareholders of the private operating entity.

After the exchange of shares, the former shareholders of the private entity, as a group, hold the majority of the voting rights of the combined entity. In addition, the former shareholders of the private entity then appoint the majority of the members of the new combined entity’s board. In this case, although the publicly listed entity issued shares to acquire the private entity, the listed entity will be identified as the accounting acquiree and the private entity as the accounting acquirer as the former shareholders of the private entity, as a group, have obtained the control over the combined entity.

I've tried to indicate the nature of this acquisition in prior posts, but here is a link that should help everyone to understand exactly what happened here: https://www.grantthornton.global/en/insights/articles/ifrs-3-insights/ifrs-3-reverse-acquisitions-explained/

Hope this helps.

To tag on another note to the limit order discussion, if you're selling a large quantity of any stock you should always use a limit order for the same reasons....OTC exchange or otherwise, CRTG or Tesla... protect your return.

Every brokerage I have ever dealt with requires a limit order for pennies, and that is to protect you. When you are selling, you only get to fill the outstanding bid orders. So, even though the price you see is .10, for example, there may only be one bid order for 1,000 shares at that price point. The next open bid might be at .08 for 1,000....then .06 for 10,000, and so on. So if you're trying to sell shares in excess of the available bids using a market order, you will see cascading diminishing returns with every bid order filled. That's why you set a limit and use a limit order. It protects you (in theory) by only filling those bids that are at or in excess of your chosen limit. You don't worry about that with larger stocks because there is so much more volume they can almost always accommodate market orders because there are so many more bids. Now, all that said...you have been the biggest proponent of this stock bar none....why are you all of a sudden entertaining thoughts of a potential early exit?

An answer more firmly rooted in reality, I believe. Generous guesstimate for earnings, though...but I tend toward the "conservative". Some here might say pessimistic, even. Sadly, my adventures in investing have formed and honed this default view of mine over time.

Armistice still has 13M+ AFTER these 14M+ are exhausted...and at .0001/sh exercise? That's a profit of just under 25k for every million they sell at .025/sh. Basically, $350k for this round of 14M warrants. I could be missing a decimal place from what they called out in the 10k, too...and that profit is assuming they sell all those shares at .025.

Careful with the talk of mergers falling through...Coretec without CoreOptics is out of cash to continue as a going concern. As much as I have vocally expressed dissent with the terms, it has to have been the best option to give the tech a chance at life and recover some of their own investment (in Keen's case at least...he has invested a considerable amount of his own money to keep this thing alive). I agree that it would be nice to see this thing close. I also believe they've been working on this deal for quite a while now, so what exactly is the hold up?

We'll be weathering Armistice for a while, yet. I believe they just exercised 14M options last month, they still have over 13M to execute at the lowest price point, then they have another huge pile of 80M+ to execute at 0.08 once the stock value settles above that. Unless management can find a way to pay off the value of those warrants we are stuck with their downward pressure for the foreseeable future. Perhaps someone else here knows if a buyout of those options is a term of the original deal?

As I've said, I really do hope that I am 100% wrong here, and that the way I'm connecting the dots on this deal is fundamentally flawed. Again, if I'm wrong then first round's on me at the "newly monied" induction ceremony. GLTA.

You're exactly right. A R/S is really only negative if the company needs to continue issuing shares to sustain operations after it is executed. I don't believe that is the case here. I do believe a R/S is imminent, but that is not why I am not a big cheerleader for this move. In this case I am skeptical due to the unknowns of actual earnings, overall debt and cash flow post-merger, and additionally, because of the unknown terms of the options granted to CoreOptics. Does the new leadership execute a R/S and *then* dilute the new share base by issuing their new shares after the R/S is enacted? This would be worst case, IMO. That said, it is exactly what I would do if I were the new CEO. This way I have listed on the OTC exchange AND acquired the IP and effectively gave absolutely nothing to do it and hugely enriched myself and my buddies. Usher out all old leadership, and then effectively eradicate and overwhelm the voting voice of the pre-existing shareholder base. I do appreciate that many here have a much more optimistic viewpoint of this merger. I hope I'm wrong, but this all looks plain as day to me. That said, I still believe there is money to be made here above cost basis, so still holding. I just don't believe this will end up being worth the time I left this money tied up in this boondoggle.