If you read that paragraph by Zacks in the link which you posted, they are talking about intrinsic value in the first five sentences. Their last two sentences were poorly worded, bordering on being incorrect. They should have said 'at expiration' or something similar.
I'm sure we're on the same page. I'm sure, for example, you would happily pay Humbl a total of $100 in exchange for 125 million non-tradeable warrants with a strike of $0.20 expiring in December, even though Humbl shares are trading OTM at $0.16 now. If you wouldn't then we're definitely not on the same page. If you would then we can drop this and chalk it up to miscommunication.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
