InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 31
Posts 3557
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/28/2007

Re: None

Sunday, 05/13/2018 11:59:55 PM

Sunday, May 13, 2018 11:59:55 PM

Post# of 191804
Another thing about the latest SHAC video that stuck out was Rory's take on shorting the stock. It actually makes sense as opposed to the standard model, it is just less applicable as time goes on here. And could it have happened as Rory is suggesting??

His premise is that shorts sold the stock short before the runup of the last 3 months and are now forced to cover at a loss. This is not the usual story told by a CEO. The usual story is that the shorts have driven the stock down from highs. So the shorts would be responsible for driving it down from $2.50 or thereabouts to a buck where it sits now. That would be the usual story line from a CEO.

In order for what Rory is proposing to be true the shorts would have had to have tried to drive it down from .10, where it was back in January, to an even lower number.

I don't know much about shorting stocks, just know that if the price continues to go down the problem that the shorts have, supposedly, will be less and less. And... one must question... would they really try to drive the price down from #0.10 to an even lower price?? At that time what was the publicity surrounding the stock like? Would there even have been an investor base to attempt to scare out of their shares as he postulates? If you want to scare investors out of their shares there has to be people listening and a somewhat elevated share price. The price had been around $0.10 for 3 years.

Just be careful with that one.

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent VERB News