Why is SMMW no longer covered on Buyins.com?
The disclaimer tells all. Dan quit paying the fee after the Buyins pump failed. From the disclaimer:
"we call the reader’s attention to the fact that BUYINS.NET is occasionally compensated a $995 per month data fee by companies covered in our reports or a third party or affiliate of the company. The author of this report, Thomas Ronk and/or his affiliates, do at times have an ownership position in companies mentioned in our reports, and so do members of his family or affiliates and may profit in the event those shares rise in value. Market commentary provided by Thomas Ronk."
ALSO:
"BUYINS.NET and its affiliates may trade for their own accounts in any securities of the issuer or in related securities. BUYINS.NET or its affiliates, directors, officers and employees, may have a long or short position in securities of the issuer or related investments."
The whole setup was a scam between two companies who hope to take advantage of each other, to the disadvantage of investors if they got mixed up in the mess.
This source of information may be satisfactory to Gorb but it isn't for me!
9 billion short, I don't think so. As a previous writer pointed out, the Buyin's threshold was reached a couple of times without effect.
Catch-22: Gorb can't have it both ways. Think about it. In order for Buyin's to be credible, then when SMMW reached the threshold the shorts covered. That means Gorb has to quit talking about the 9B short position. Unfortunately for Gorb the cover had no effect on the PPS.
If Gorb is correct that there is still a 9B short position, when we reached the threshold number the shorts didn't cover, rendering the Buyin's trigger point data as worthless.
Which is it Gorb? Do we still have a 9B short position?
If yes, then why didn't it trigger a cover resulting an increase in the PPS when SMMW reached the threshold?
If no then stop talking about it.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
