News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Rogerthat1

12/11/15 9:19 PM

#11175 RE: rnoutlaw21 #11165

Thanks for that post. Regardless. About 5.7M shares issued. Avg vol for the last 5 trading sessions has been around 3 mil per. So even if there may have been some retail profit taking (heck I know about 100K share volume out of that was mine lol), some of these shares may have already been absorbed if they were hitting the float. The mms are running this IMO and the evidence of that you'll have seen if you were watching L2 last few days like I was. Also they closed it just above or at support at 70c. They didn't want to break the chart at close. This will run soon. IMO.
icon url

Investor_cmz

12/11/15 10:53 PM

#11181 RE: rnoutlaw21 #11165

I don't have time to fully explain it to you but (first of all its 1% not 10% according to rule 144)

http://media.mofo.com/files/Uploads/Images/FAQRule144_145.pdf

http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/rule144.htm

and by my calculations he can sell up to 1M shares of common stock over any 3 month rolling period preceding the date of the sale. He is an "affiliate" and his shares are not "restricted" they are "controlled"

And isn't it quite ironic that the share price peaks on 9 Dec. and continued to then fall over the course of the week? Then you have the 8K come out explaining the warrants are excercised between 30 Nov -9 Dec ?

Are you telling me that isn't a coincidence ?

Come on now... If these stocks weren't sold to the market maker, it sure seems quite suspicious to me.
icon url

Investor_cmz

12/11/15 11:04 PM

#11184 RE: rnoutlaw21 #11165

Sorry, misread the 1% and 10% you mentioned. I was referring to the 1% volume; you are right about 10% ownership