Cav,
To repeat…
Already addressed.
Post #268679.
(See below.)
And, as earlier stated…
The inside hosts no interest, whatsoever, in dealing with the author. A matter of persona non grata. Wholly unwelcome.
Bearing in mind that insane speculation, such as near-term trading levels far in advance of $25.00, isn't the answer.
Said author having displayed nothing (ahem) short of sheer mania at times. In some of his more colorful presentments. Ranting and raving. Name-calling. Vulgarity. Crudity to the point of crassness. Exhibiting extreme defensiveness in the face of having any of his more absurd viewpoints challenged in any way. To any degree.
It being more than a little obvious that the collective position held represents investing/trading principal that cannot affordably be lost. Resulting in the mania often displayed. The extreme defensiveness.
Any/all challenges to the insane speculation met with a middle aged six-year old routine at best.
Sad story.
A need of remaining realistic. Of maintaining composure at all times. Of, certainly, avoiding potential financial disaster for one's self. Avoiding blind greed.
The reality being that the MOASS is far from an impossible turn of events. No argument. With the advent of any such calling for, not simply the significant upside, but the sustained such. Continued advancement over time. Any significant weakness and it simply won't happen. Weakness, that is, of the fundamental and operational variety.
And, thus, the reason why earlier I spoke of that which always feeds that proverbial bulldog i.e., the ongoing forward periods picture.
Projections and guidance.
Earnings.
The best chance for the MOASS being realized coming in line with neither the past nor the present, but the future.
The guilty seeing, more than clearly, that the opportunity to cover at lowest possible cost is a matter of sooner rather than later.
With my harboring no personal ill will toward Doug. But he need definitely to come back down to earth and to routinely conduct himself in a manner fully commensurate with his age and overall station in life.
And, as earlier stated, whether the talked about agreement proves up as fact or fiction carries little weight for me.
Post #268905.
Found also at that 'other place'.
--------------------
Kelly…
Affirmative.
And sure. I'd be happy to.
With a need of bearing in mind that our good friends Alfie and crew have, from day one, maintained a massive collective vested financial interest. Steadfastly clinging to the prospect of the eventual advent of the MOASS. The relevant posting histories being there. Talk of $25.00 being the least of it. So on.
And "dreaming"?
Blind greed?
Massive wishful thinking?
As for legality?
What would be illegal would be if management had earlier acceded to the appeal for a 300m long position priced at $0.03 per share. Having issued the stock. Scooping a cool $9m for themselves in the process.
Wholly illegal.
Illegal being the plain and simple existence of the phantom float. NOT its mandated elimination via the open market.
My understanding being that the agreement exists. As outlined. The serving of subpoenas having revealed all as talked about. And on from there.
And it certainly fits. The whole of it.
No argument.
The whole of it being, in the absolute, in the best interest of the issuing company and its shareholder base. For extremely obvious reasons.
Total no-brainer.
No amount of "dreaming" indeed altering plain and simple reality.
Just for the record.
Of course.
--------------------
AI
