seems to me that there's a reason that traders trade stock rather than holding it, even at the cost of taking a loss -- it's called becoming a stuckholder. and being as this stock is in pink pennyland, where holding without a serious story and a stream of revenue unrelated to shares is the most dangerous play of all, i'm mostly interested in it for its trading pattern. at this point, the thing that counts most to me is that this stock is currently in play. it's trending upwards and breaking out from a more than half year's sideways trend. today it did it's thing with volume. should this trend hold, this stock will prolly test the high of the year at .012, and it may do it soon -- whatever soon is.
so what am i missing here? this is all a gamble, but that's still a clean double from here. and isn't the aim in this game to make money? of course maybe i'm a little misguided about this. perhaps i missed the part that playing the market requires that the stocks we buy adhere to a set of moral ethics that we can be proud of. like never going down in price.
yeah, right!
as for your diatribe about JB, i don't know a ton about this company, its history, or the players, but what i see here is a stock that hasn't had a reverse split, isn't being diluted on a regular basis, and has had runs to trade in. last year it traded up from .004 in March to .012 in June, and there was ample time to get out. there was also plenty of time over the last six months to quietly accumulate for today's run. anything wrong with selling some shares bought around .003 for .005 or .006? no, i didn't think so.
so while i feel bad for those who have been in this too long, or are in too high, i can't feel too sorry for them. learning how to sell is the most important lesson there is, and no CEO, promoter, or poster can be blamed for any buyers lack of a selling finger.
good luck to you!
rich
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
