InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 103
Posts 10409
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/06/2006

Re: kid70 post# 117967

Thursday, 05/26/2011 11:10:44 PM

Thursday, May 26, 2011 11:10:44 PM

Post# of 173009
That's not the way it works, sadly. The whole theory was that shorts needed to cover before the divi, because being short the stock would also involve being short the divi, which they would be unable to cover because it is a share in another company. They would have to cover no matter how many shares were available. It would result in a tremendous short squeeze if true.

Sadly, some, maybe many, penny stocks try to explain their dramatic price declines by conspiracy theories regarding shorts and/or market makers, when not only management, but also most investors making those claims, know full well the price declines are due to dilution, tremendously high share structure (try counting to 15 billion), and not producing on their product.

ENTI is one of those that actually does seem to have a tangible product, though I can't say I think they are doing a good job of marketing it in a timely manner. It's beyond me why the CEO insists the stock is being shorted, and blames the brokerages for the shares not being delivered, when the real truth of the matter is he was unable to maintain compliance with the DTC like every other normal company.

He is being misleading. He'd be better off to just shoot straight, and for some reason he insists on deception about this, which gives the impression there must be deception elsewhere in his company.

The idea that there are a lot of people who found shares of a triple zero company to short is really just laughable.

The sleeping giant awakens....