InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 175
Posts 18662
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 11/29/2010

Re: Rhinegold post# 75071

Thursday, 02/22/2018 5:15:53 PM

Thursday, February 22, 2018 5:15:53 PM

Post# of 100623
That's a good example of why it's foolhardy to infer the performance of one ticker is in any way indicative of what might happen to another.

People here have repeatedly brought up OW*P and the fact that it "ran to $3.23." So here's the autopsy on that claim-->

First of all, OW*P has an A/S of 500,000,000 vs. 5,799,499,999 for BLDV (which is 1,060% greater). Their O/S is a mere 147,758,908 vs 5,385,585,689 for BLDV (3,545% greater and virtually maxed out).

In order to accurately compare the two BLDV would have to pull a 1-for-11.6 reverse split. That means the current PPS would have to be raised by the same 11.6 which --at today's close of .0011-- equates to 0.01276 compared to OW*P's close of 0.407 (3,089.66% higher than BLDV's and a mere 102% above their 52 week low of .201).

Secondly, let's compare the runs of both stocks. If you take BLDV's 52 week high of .0057 and multiply it by the same 11.6 R/S then that increases BLDV's all time high to 0.06612 vs OW*P's $3.23.

Clearly there's no rhyme or reason to compare the two. OW*P is a classic example of the "Greater fool theory" of investing.


In the stock market, the greater fool theory applies when many investors make a questionable investment, with the assumption that they will be able to sell it later to "a greater fool". In other words, they buy something not because they believe that it is worth the price, but rather because they believe that they will be able to sell it to someone else at an even higher price. It is also called survivor investing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

It's a closed system. Any profits realized came directly from the pockets of other speculators.. not from any business activity that constituted a going concern.

My "opinion" is as valid as your "hearsay"