DUSS , Reviewing what we know...
"Compliments of a savvy long"
1. Natalie Bannister was hired as a consultant over 1 yr ago to seek a merger or acquisition or other suitable venture to enhance the value of DUSS for the current shareholders
2. During the course of the last year the share structure of DUSS has remained the same.
3. During the course of the last year Natalie remained tight lipped about her task of seeking candidates for the above, a far cry from the typical pumping, lying nature of CEOs in pennyland
4. DUSS remains SEC reporting and current
5. There have been no promotional campaigns, awareness campaigns, IR or other methods typically seen in the OTC by companies looking for a merger
6. As of very recent it has been verified by an accredited long shareholder that there are zero shares available for shorting this security through legal channels. This was verified by Goldman Sachs. This means that all legal shares available to short this stock are already borrowed and have yet to be cleared. THIS IS HUGE NEWS AS WE SIT ON THE CUSP OF SOME VERY BIG ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE NEW CEO
7. The recent trading activity on DUSS shows very BULLISH support and the firm indication that shareholders are convinced that Natalie has done her job.
8. The resignation of Natalie Bannister shows a very positive indicator that she has completed the work that she was tasked to perform. This resignation was done willfully and not as a result of any failure to complete her work and is complemented by the 8k introduction of a new CEO
9. By contrast to numerous scams and shady CEOs that the OTC is renowned for all the above reasons indicate that Natalie Bannister has succeeded in her task and we now sit on the precipice of a brand new ERA of DUSS. It is quite customary by real businesses to make the required changes to management and file all required paperwork for a merger or acquisition with the proper authorities during a "quiet" period as to not intentionally or inadvertently manipulate the price per share of the security in question.
AI
