Hi loanwolf -
I first want to say that it is my good fortune to have daned to have replied to you over on the other board because, as it so happens, my Automated Engine for trading decision making is now on a second platform and I made the decision on or about the first week of July to turn it to big board option plays. I chased your posting history over here to see what other plays you are into, and I was pleased to find this board, which I'm board marking.
Man... if there isn't enough here to sift thru on a daily basis, then I must not be paying attention!! LOL. Not a bass body of ideas you have here, bubba. Well done indeed.
Now as regards your comments on the registration statements over on that other board, rather than post here and then over there, since I daytrade and seek efficiency as more than theory, it follows that combining my approving comments (above) with my disapproving comment regarding your comments on the other.... well, combining both into a single post is just more efficient.
I have to get to trading. I'm already late for the day..... making money, mind you because of an ETF I did two days ago, but still, more interested in keeping this efficient than in posting two places, twice constituting duplication of effort.
So I apologize ahead of time for combing he ideas into a single post. So, in the interests of efficiency, I'll cut to the chase.
Listen to the internals of what I'm trying to convey & do so via a lab experiment.... a petri dish, as it were.
Change your focus from the S-1 & registerable shares and so forth & re-read the terms under which pricing gets set via the put. The pricing structure laid out explicitly is key.
Then, think like a flow diagram, like I do when I write AI script to handle real time aggregated data. White board it. Lay it out in outline. You said I'm incorrect, but I am not.
Its not incorrect to observe, as I did, that the other company controls the timing. Legends, or lack thereof, will not govern the share timing or pricing.
Just lay it out. White board the process. Take a real chart example of when there was a parabolic rise in price. Run the numbers assuming the parabolic days as the timing of the lab experiment. Theoretically time the thing as though some past instance of price upswing controls the future put to Centurian. Do it on flat times. Do it on parabolic up times. Do it on modest up times. Do it on down times. Experimentally lay it out and all will become clear, grasshopper, LOL.
You will inevitably see that they get exactly the same $$$$$ amount, whether they sell at a high or not. And bear this in mind: as an element in the petri dish of your experiment, they have a pattern of maintaining, at all costs, control of things. That family always does things in such a way that they have their best chance of coming away with all the chits in any gaming board. If there is real gold in them thar hills, (and there is) they will not sell their future for a mere 7 million in fiat paper.
With this being the reality, it is simply not what the legends on a subset of shares say or don't say.
Its governed by a max amount of $$$ attainable, a fixed lowball price setting formula, and a stretched time frame that is impossible to control by front ending the thing..... plus the absolute control they have in the timing.
Do the lab test using ups charts, consolidating charts, falling charts. You will see, visually, that their control of the timing matters and that the fixed $$$ amount, not any given legend on shares, is the key to this deal that makes it at least highly likely that the family will get it's fixed amounts of $$$$ and not suffer a loss of control or a massive dilution in price.
Just run the petri dish experiments. It will take time, but having done so, it will make sense to you, I believe.
There is obviously a chance they are crooks. On the other hand, its also highly likely, given these chemicals in the petri dish of the real events they intend to pull off, that they intend to get money and not dilute, using their control of the timing and the formula for unanticipatable price setting to ameliorate the downsides.
I think they deliberately drew up a very cunning plan.
It may trip them up in its own cleverness, but I absolutely repudiate the simple notion that is so easy off the lips of so many posters that they are simply going to do a P&D at shareholder's expense. They've had their money tied up for for years. Time enough for a PO&D. Greedy plans work themselves out, like a bad case of acne, well before a 4 to 5 year time span. You know the drill. This one ain't into flash in the pan P&D. Too much water is already under the bridge. Plain as the nose on may face, IMHO.
So, now I have said my piece. Back to trading gotta make a nickle. Gotta look at the big board option play that have the volume to trade. Especially with tomorrow being the 15th, and what not. Those stinky pinkies take back burner for the minute. And thats why I am delighted to have found this board.
I am now going to examine the present board and winnow massive good ideas from it, for having given it a glance, I am, as I said, very pleased to have chased your postings down and found this site.
Very well done, indeed.
Hope my combining the two posts in on doesn't get this one cut, but if it does loanwolf, take the time, as an assistant mod to look it up under the management page. If you have to cut it, I understand, but even so, take a minute and look at what I'm saying and run the experiments I'm advising, under various scenarios. I like your thoughtfulness and I would be greatly surprised if you insisted on not granting that there is a core legitimacy to the idea I'm trying to convey that is largely true, if not in fact, wholly so.
Cheers & good trading.
Imperial Whazoo
AI
