Branded Legacy Inc (BLEG)

[sleekscape]

MY TAKE ON FRIDAY


So there are only 2 possibilities concerning who paid for a promotion in VATE on Friday:

Insiders or Non-insiders (third party)

Let's start with the 1st possibility:

Did VATE Insiders engage in paid promotion?

Since history tends to repeat itself and is often the best predictor of future events, the best way to figure out the answer to that question is to look into the history of VATE -- do they have any history of paid stock promotion?

I looked into it and found no history of paid stock promotion in VATE

The only thing I could find was an interview with SmallVapVoice.com in 2017 for which they issued a press release on 6/29/17:

The volume that day was 224,768 shares

https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/VATE/news/Elev8-Brands-Inc-Chief-Executive-Officer-Ryan-Medico-is-now-Featured-in-a-New-Audio-Interview-at-SmallCapVoicecom?id=163494

---

So the next question that seemed relevant to ask is if VATE was going to do its 1st paid promotion, why would they choose Friday to do it?

It's a real struggle to come up with any rational reason -- instead, what popped into my mind were a slew of questions

Why would they risk ruining their reputation at this early stage when VATE is a very young and rapidly growing company?

Why would they risk ruining their reputation when VATE has great products in a rapidly growing industry?

Why would they risk ruining their reputation when we are only 6 weeks into what many feel is going to be a breakout year for MJ/CBD/Hemp stocks?

Why would they risk ruining their reputation when VATE has a very strong base of shareholders and a growing following?

Why would they risk ruining their reputation when VATE has a proven track record of going on explosive runs and has already or nearly hit bottom?

There are no logical answers to any of these questions

---

So let's take a look at the 2nd possibility:

Did a third party engage in paid promotion on Friday?

That is the only option that makes any sense at all

And when one delves deeper into that possibility, everything starts to line up in a rational fashion

So here are the relevant questions that need answering:

Who would have the motivation to make VATE look bad?

Why would they be motivated to make VATE look bad?

How did they want to make current VATE shareholders feel?

How did they want to make prospective (those who don't currently own shares but are considering buying) VATE shareholders feel?

What did they want current VATE shareholders to think?

What did they want prospective VATE shareholders to think?

How did they want current VATE shareholders to behave?

How did they want prospective VATE shareholders to behave?

---

So let's attempt to answer these questions:

Who would have the motivation to make VATE look bad?

Somebody who wanted to drive the stock price down by causing panic selling

Why would they be motivated to make VATE look bad?

So they could buy VATE shares on the cheap

There are 2 possible reasons for wanting to buy cheap shares:

So they could accumulate shares at rock bottom prices and go long

So they could cover a short position

Or a combination of both

How did they want current VATE shareholders to feel?

Angry
Confused
Panicked
Swindled
Hopeless

How did they want prospective VATE shareholders to feel?

Fearful
Uninterested

What did they want current VATE shareholders to think?

That VATE is a pump and dump scam

What did they want prospective VATE shareholders to think?

That VATE is a pump and dump scam

How did they want current VATE shareholders to behave?

To sell every share of VATE

How did they want prospective VATE shareholders to behave?

To avoid buying VATE

---

Both of these questions bear repeating:

Who would have the motivation to make VATE look bad?

Somebody who wanted to drive the stock price down by causing panic selling

Why would they be motivated to make VATE look bad?

So they could buy VATE shares on the cheap

There are two possible reasons:

So they could accumulate shares at rock bottom prices and go long

So they could cover a short position

Or a combination of both

I saw evidence of both, particularly with the return of previous short seller ASCM after being absent from Level 2 for the past 1 month

ASCM was predominantly on the ask above .04 and predominantly on the bid below .04 and they soaked up somewhere between 8M-12M shares on the bid

It makes the most logical sense that the promotion was designed to sell shorted shares to the new buyers responding to the newsletter above the previous bottom of .038, then take the stock below that support level to induce panic selling by those same new buyers, in addition to inducing panic selling by VATE shareholders who owned shares before Friday

This would allow them to sit in the .03s, cover their short position, and accumulate shares for the upcoming reversal

---

We can conclude several things from looking at the trading action on Friday

There was a ton of panic selling as the volume hit 41.2M shares

The majority of the float turned over and classic capitulation occurred

During the 1st half of the day, the volume was massive, but during the 2nd half of the day, the selling slowed and the volume dried up

Despite the massive turnover in shares, the stock only dropped 26% and virtually all of the shares were bought above .03

So where does VATE go from here?

The CEO Ryan Medico replied on Friday to a ton of shareholder emails and has made it known that VATE will soon be putting out a response to what occurred on Friday, which many presume, myself included, will occur on Monday morning

I strongly believe that VATE will move upwards from here once the market hears directly from Medico and fully digests what happened last week


Sleek