To reply to your question, and I am just using my brain's reasoning power here and not any substantive empirical facts: I would argue that any RISK of or potential for dilution has already been priced into the stock when it dropped in July following the first PR notice about the August 20th vote. Thus, if there is a negative effect, and by 'negative effect' I am referring to a drop in share price, the decline should be incredibly minimal due to the fact that there has already been an immediate reaction to the news.
An ACTUAL increase in the OUTSTANDING shares right now would only confirm the fear, but the fear has already set in. That is why I am worried about 0.02 and 0.03 as resistance levels, because the company will have to prove it is actually growing production and revenues if it is to regain the confidence of traders and investors. But we must realize that those who hold shares around 0.01-0.02 AND those who entered new positions recently have already factored in and understand the potential for the A/S increase.
I would argue that it is highly probable the vote will go through to increase the Authorized share limit, but I would also argue as I have time and time again that this does not mean the company will increase Outstanding shares. If the company is finally revving up production and making positive revenue, then it should be able to gradually pay off its debt and grow its business by taking on new debt with its now more profitable business as the collateral. Before, they had to introduce more and more shares into the float because they were still a young company in need of capital. But if they are finally becoming profitable, they will be able to secure capital by other means rather than by dilution. I hate to say this, but I think I actually 'trust' this CEO and his management team despite the fact that I got burned from the Lone Oak well #1 news.
