Your welcome, Clark. I'm glad to see you're still here.
As far as the "sample time period" used to gather the ratio from factual data, it was longer than the period used for an estimate. The factual data was for the period from July 2016 to the end of January 2017. That's over 6 months. Since then, it has only been 4 and a half months till now. So, the timeframe used to gather a ratio from factual data was a larger timeframe than was used to speculate.
This came out to 6.7 billion. I then even rounded that way up to 9 or 10. These are very conservative estimates. I would guess between 7 and 12 outstanding.
As far as community sentiment and volume being your reasoning to think it's higher, the volume is what it is. That doesn't affect anything. The volume numbers used in all scenarios, whether factual or estimated, are given as facts in the equation. Community sentiment being lower in the last few months would actually cause the ratio of shares added to the OS compared to shares traded, to be lower. This is because when sentiment is low, current holders would sell to another entity. This would provide trading volume, but not add to the OS. If community sentiment was high, they would be buying conversion notes which would add to the OS rather than buying them from and unhappy retailer which would not add to the OS.
There are billions traded from one to another. To say that there is close to 20 billion outstanding with only about 20 billion traded all year and only 1.7 OS before that would indicate that over 90 percent of the volume was only buyers, buying from the dilution MMs.
This is highly unlikely. Many traders have come and gone, buying millions and billions, then selling and moving on. This trading action does not increase the OS. It only affects the total volume traded.
I'll stand by my calculations. The fact that I'm probably correct would indicate a lower OS than you may hope for. This does not mean that all of the shares will be used solely for dilution. If my calculations are correct, this still leaves a lot of room for those in the know, or other directors/partners, to obtain their stake without raising the OS.
The actions in the Nevada SOS are puzzling at best. I've asked other people, much more knowlegeble than myself, and there is no definitive answer.
Another interesting fact, that Ive pointed out before, is the amount of series B authorized through the Nevada SOS. This actually implies that the OS is below 5.5 billion, which is too low IMO. The amount of series B authorized through the Nevada SOS is only 11 million. At 500 votes per share, that equates to only 5.5 billion votes.
The company has always maintained just over 50 percent voting control through the series B. This is a fact. Knowing that the company could not possibly have over 5.5 billion votes of series B, there are not many options. Either the company has lost voting control, or???? If they purchased common shares, there would be a filing.
One possibility is that insiders, not listed as directors, could have bought just enough common stocks to not have to file. Example being if 10 insiders not listed as directors each bought 3 percent, that would be thirty percent and when added to the series B votes, they would still have the voting control.
So, either the company has lost voting control, or insiders do have common stock. Remember, if they are not listed as directors, or they own less than 5 percent, a filing is not required.
I'm getting off track here. I agree Clark, this is all speculation. It's the best I can do with what I have. I believe I'm pretty close. As usual, we need filings. I'm still confident they will. They always have. This is an anomaly.
AI
