trum, thanks for helping raise my credibility score. My comments are in BOLD
u wrote:
sometimes you get off track with your wild theories and guess (heck with a penny scam like pyct it is no wonder there are so many excuses being made for its failures)
I TRY TO KEEP A POSITIVE OUTLOOK ON PYCT, AS I STILL HAVE SHARES (SOLD NONE). THAT'S WHAT REAL LONGS DO ON BBs. FAKE LONGS ARE TRYING TO GET ME TO SELL. NOT AT THESE PRICES. HOW ABOUT YOU??
Sometimes we just won't be able to make perfect sense of it all until we fully admit that we don't really know - and to that point I stated "regardless of how much under .0001 the sell went off at."
AGAIN ?????
In your attempt to come up with an explanation for the Hundreds of Millions of shares sold at UNDER .0001
ALMOST 5 YEARS OF TRACKING I COME UP WITH THE FOLLOWING NUMBERS:
(OK, THOUGHT YOU WROTE HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS)
@ UNDER .0001 for========1,023,708,081 *******
@ .0001 for=============11,980,239,237
@ .0002 for===============585,543,672
2@ .0004 for================1,200,000
2@ .0006 for==================258,000
4 months not tracked========907,663,350
****** HOW MANY OF THESE SHARES WERE SHORTLY BEFORE BEING SOLD AT UNDER .0001 WERE BOUGHT BY MMs AT .0001, IS NOW UP FOR QUESTION
ie. IF 1 BILLION WERE IN "THE PATTERN", IT WOULD MEAN ONLY 23.7M WERE SOLD BY 'SHAREHOLDERS', MEANING FEWER PERSONS THAN THOUGHT HAVE 'SOLD OUT ACCEPTING A LOSE AT UNDER .0001'
you stated
"THE SHORTS SELL BACK TO THEMSELVES...at under .0001, so if the MMs (as you are claiming) are buying these shares as you are somehow claiming how much did they sell them for? YOU DON"T KNOW.
I DON'T CARE HOW MUCH. MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT
THE SAME PERSON DOES THE "BUY AND SELL AT .0001",
THEN AT A LATER TIME
'THE SAME PERSON DOES THE "SELL AND BUY AT UNDER .0001".
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT PRICE, BOTH SIDES OF BOTH TRADES ARE THE SAME PERSON
THEY ARE SELLING TO THEMSELVES.
AGAIN, WITH NUMBERS TO MAKE IT (HOPEFULLY) EASIER TO UNDERSTAND.
'THE SAME PERSON' SELL 27,274,300 SHARES FOR $2,727.43 (BROKEN UP INTO 10 TRADES) TO 'THE SAME PERSON'.
LATER THAT SAME DAY (MARCH 27th)
SOMEONE, I BELIEVE "THE SAME PERSON' SELLS 27,274,300 SHARES FOR UNDER $2,727.43 (ONE TRADE) TO A Market Maker, WHOM I BELIEVE IS THEIR SELF "THE SAME PERSON'. MM ARE THE ONLY ONES ALLOWED TO "BUY" UNDER .0001
My whole point was that your goofy theory is has a major flaw which you can't see (yet).
when reading your goofy theory you need to keep in mind the following facts (had you considered them then you likely would held back from posting such nonsense) :
1) You don't know what the selling price of the shares are at under .0001 - it could be .00005 or .000075...or it could be exactly the amount that insiders were given their shares at.
'PRICE' IS A RED HERRING YOU ARE TRYING TO 'MAKE INTO AN ISSUE'. THEY ARE 'SELLING TO THEMSELVES'....PICK A NUMBER!!!!
2) The BILLIONS of shares that were / are structured at UNDER .0001 that could be sold... how many BILLIONs is that eh?
IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THIS DEBATE, BECAUSE I SHOW THE 'MMs BUY THE STOCK AND THEN SHORTLY AFTER 'SELL'
3) You still don't understand how shorting causes an Failure To Deliver to get registered.... there are none with pyct
I BELIEVE OTHERWISE, BUT IT'S NOT PART OF THIS DEBATE
4) You stitched together 8 situations where you try to make it look like your theory has a real pattern...after the board looked at your evidence it looks rather desperate when you try to pick and choose days worth trades to try to match it up....only 8 eh.... maybe if you try using months you can match up a couple more...clearly there is no pattern as you were felt so strongly about.
"STITCHED TOGETHER 8 SITUATIONS WHERE 'I' TRY"...LOL AND HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THOSE TRADES. AS COINCIDENCE??? LOL. "only 8 eh"
"after the board looked at 'MY' evidence" I DIDN'T SEE THE NEED TO PROVE THE PATTERN ANY STRONGER. ALTHOUGH I DID, TO TRY AND HELP YOU (DIDN'T WORK), I ALSO PICKED OUT NOVEMBER. YOU SEE, I TRIED TO PICK OUT "THE OBVIOUS BY THE NUMBER', SO THAT "EVERYONE" WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE 'THE PATTERN'. I'M SURE A LOT MORE "DOUBLE TRADES" WERE DONE. 'BUY AND SELL AT .0001' THEN 'SELL AND BUY AT UNDER .0001'.
5) You wisely run away from trying to defend your claim of shorting every time you are confronted with:
Is the short your trying to paint one that :
- is provable, traceable?
OR
- is it the type of short that can't be proven?
Which is it?
AND YOU 'WISELY RUN AWAY' FROM MY QUESTION:
MY ASKING FOR YOUR GUESS AS TO HOW MANY SHARES DO YOU "THINK" WERE SHORTED DURING THE P&D. BUT THAT'S OK. YOU DID "HELP" HERE.
WHAT'S YOUR GUESS?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
