Replies to post #70254 on Moon Equity Holdings Corp (MONI)

[BIOCHEMUP]

Looks like I started buying too soon, oh well, we're all in the same boat here, better stick through if you did the DD. I like their peruvian mine assets. Enjoy buying at the $0,01 mark. Eventually Alison will come through.

Moon tasked a team to perform almost three months of exploratory due diligence on the ground from the South tip of Peru to the Northern Border of Ecuador meeting with numerous local municipalities, tribal leaders, and land owners. Moon has been searching for the best opportunities for its long-term future in Peru while considering the current state of available opportunities for mineral processing and continuous mineral supply.

[parabolic2020]

IN MY OPINION:

In short (or long), I believe there is a discrepancy in the share structure between what the company believes is the actual outstanding shares, and what was revealed during the initial share audit that occurred during the cert exchange when the company executed a name change.

If you recall there was a lot of confusion during that week and multiple reports from a broker that it was waiting for the company to "issue" shares.

This "discrepancy" was validated with the PCAOB audit which I believe the company did to verify their position. The announcement of the company having the audit in hand applied pressure to resolve this situation with the other "party" and served as leverage to come to a resolution. There are 4 scenarios which I believe may have led to this discrepancy:

1)All of Angelo's Soukas shares issued to him before the last cancelation were not absorbed into the market and create a liability for the company with the reduced share structure.

2) The PCAOB audit revealed a previously unknown or additional issuance of shares by the former company to someone or someone entity, possibly linked to the first acquisition in an attempt to close the deal. It could have also validated that the company is correct, and there are unauthorized shares in the market.

3)A particular Broker had an discrepancy with their cert.

4) Some combination of the first 3 or similar situation leading to the following resolution:

It is MY OPINION that there has been an agreement of some sort which is allowing this discrepancy to be resolved at the same price that all other shares were cancelled, which was .01 as stated in the filings.

The above scenarios would explain many of the events that we have seen, or not seen.

1) The strange tweet during the weekend of the name change stating "delays by brokers ".. "Out of our control".. (scenario 3)

2) The TA not being updated until this "discrepancy" is resolved

3) The apparent "firewall " and accelerated volume around the .01 level (resolution in progress to remove shares).

4) The silence by the company regarding the mining acquisitions until discrepancy is resolved (scenario 2).

5) The Form 10 not being filed , which requires the company to state the correct OS

6) The fills of large orders BELOW the bid observed multiple times while price was higher.

While the exact amount of this discrepancy is obviously unknown to the public, it is apparent that the company believes it will be resolved by the time the next filing on or before March 30th.

I also agree that whatever is taking place the the current share published on the otc will remain the same after this process is complete and things will move forward at that point.

I've explained in previous posts how the shares could be removed by F&L III without a disclosure being needed by MONI as they are separate public and private entities, if that is a needed remedy.

I am NOT stating the above information as fact, just my opinion based on events that have transpired and proposing a plausible theory based on such.

Let's see if the volume continues, or stops :-).

GLTU