Hemp Inc (HEMP)

[Det_Robert_Thorne]

Read more carefully. Two stocks mentioned in article

That nearly 5 1/2 year-old article, published on SA at the end of January, 2014, was written to highlight the extreme market cap and tiny float of a CBD-from-industrial-hemp company that has since changed its name and stock symbol.

The two out-of-context quotes you've provided don't support what appears to be your challenge to the claim [by others] that HEMP can't be shorted.

Editors' Note: This article covers a stock trading at less than $1 per share and/or with less than a $100 million market cap. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.

At the time of publication, the stock price ($85.55) and market cap ($1.2B) of the subject company of the article both exceeded the limits set in the editors note, but the other company (the primary company's "partner", as it were,) had a stock price of approximatly $0.40, which was well under the $1.00 limit. It was that second company to which the Editors' note was applied.

As to my article's second quote about the primary company being a potential short, the arguments on this board usually center around whether or not sub-$1.00 stocks like HEMP, which may not have one or more market makers, can be shorted.

I can't be sure one way or the other about HEMP, but I do know that in the case of the stock about which the Jan 27, 2014 article was written, the following facts were:

1) Unlike HEMP, that company was registered with the SEC and fully-filing, with actual 10-Qs and audited 10-K statements available at the SEC site.

2) The subject company had market makers which had filed Form 211 with the SEC. I've not been able to establish such filings for HEMP.

3) The subject company's stock price was at $85.55, well above the $2.50 borrowing minimum that is often discussed. Hemp, Inc's current stock price of $0.0149 is at only 0.6% of that minimum.

It appears to me that the underlying facts behind my article don't support your implication.