My initial impression of WIlly's post isn't
lengthy for tonight. I'm a bit tired here and going to call it an early night. I'll comb through it more tomorrow, along with anything else that develops.
~41,000 shareholders, and he is assuming 10,000 shares per shareholder? I'm not critical of his post at all, but who else thinks that average is a bit low? At our highest level of .0012 recently, thats $12. At the current levels of .0004, that's 4 bucks.
Being it's the close of the weekend, I'll go back to my norm of staying away from speculating. On a weekend, I don't mind focusing on UCAD or other partners, as well as other thoughts.
So even though I'm not going to guess at the average number held by each shareholder, but I would think it would be at or greater than 5 to 10 times higher than the figure he offered. Does anyone else see it different?
If this post is true...then what does this say about the naked shorting issue?
If true, then I am glad I received my requested certs 3 weeks ago. I only say this because I am not sure how this will play out. I've not seen anyone post links or references when such a situation had to resolve itself in the past with any other company. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, I'm just saying I'm not aware of any outcome to a similar sitation, which is why I made the cert request in mid-June.
I'm open to discussion on this, as my focus will remain mainly on value. However, I would think any squeeze benefits us all.
If Willy's figure on the number of shareholder's is true, then this is the first of many very important revelations that begin to uncover what the MM's have been up to. Hopefully a squeeze and return to fair trading will help our pps greatly. Too many days where 90-97% buys at .0004 without a raise in the pps.
I guess we'll all soon see. : )
Be well, Bo
