"if they dilute again to finance the site c then i assure you the stock will go to .15 cents because of dilution. so the question is why buy now when you can buy after dilution?"
I'm not entirely convinced that's the case. Yes it's possible we would see a retraction in PPS if the market considers such a move as pure dilution. But I would maintain that if the funds generated by issuing new shares are used solely for the construction of new facilities, it should be seen as capital improvements of the Coalinga campus and thereby raise their NAV by the exact same amount.
I choose to look at it this way. If I need a hammer to perform a certain job and I issue shares of stock equal to the cost of the hammer, then yes, on one side I've got shares of stock out there (consider that to be a liability for the purposes of this discussion). But on the other side of the equation, I own a hammer which is worth exactly what the shares are worth. Consider the hammer to be an offsetting asset. So it actually should be considered to be a net change of zero. Liabilities are increased but so too are hard assets. The net change should be zero.
Now, it's a completely different story if shares are issued simply to fund day-to-day operating expenses.
One more example:
Let's say a company is worth $100.00. I issue 100 shares of stock. Therefore each share is worth $1.00.
If I issue 100 more shares without increasing the NAV of the company, then each share would only be worth $0.50 ($100.00 NAV / 200 shares). But if I also increase the NAV of the company by $100.00 it would then be worth $200.00. Therefore each share would still be worth $1.00 / share ($200.00 NAV / 200 shares).
I personally believe that the current PPS is less than the company's real estate holdings, licensing, corporate structure, and name recognition.
AI
