News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Zadie420

03/02/25 9:06 PM

#752150 RE: branster #752149

Agreed.
icon url

7longyears

03/02/25 9:20 PM

#752151 RE: branster #752149

Amen,skibigtoe is a blow hard.
icon url

ilovetech

03/02/25 9:49 PM

#752153 RE: branster #752149

Yeah, I don't get it either, and saying it so cavalierly, like no self awareness. Does announcing it somehow admonish the sin? SMH.
icon url

skitahoe

03/02/25 10:04 PM

#752156 RE: branster #752149

On more than one occasion I've voiced the fact that lending the shares gives me the option to pull them when I feel the time is right. I've expressed it as a way NWBO investors can both make money, and help to make the squeeze worse for the shorts. Right now Fidelity won't allow me to put a buy on the stock at a price I'd consider to help in a squeeze, but I believe once we're into the $1 to $2 range they will. I'm fine with the criticism, but I have previously mentioned this strategy.

I would suspect that many here may have their shares being borrowed without making anything, and without knowing it. I know it, I know they're not borrowing all the shares they could, and I welcome the thousands I've seen from it, it permitted the purchase of additional shares.

I'll repeat my belief that the shares known to be outstanding shorts is far from the total shorts. Those we know of aren't nearly as damaging as what's hidden by the MM's and their manipulation.

I look forward to when I can routinely set trailing stop loss orders, but not until we're trading around $10 or more.

A fraction of my shares has permitted me to add roughly 8,000 shares a month, frankly if they took more shares I wouldn't mind as I'd just buy more.

Gary
Bullish
Bullish
icon url

improving

03/03/25 7:42 AM

#752192 RE: branster #752149

Agreed, I'm not understanding it either. Troubling to say the least. Management has repeatedly requested shareholders to check their brokerage agreements and preclude mm's option to lend their shares out. Not helpful to nor supportive of the company's efforts. Damaging on a number of levels. It does make you wonder.
icon url

RobotDroid

03/03/25 7:57 AM

#752195 RE: branster #752149

Exactly. He is on Linda worthless payroll.
icon url

FeMike

03/03/25 10:45 AM

#752235 RE: branster #752149

Cult members towards Skitahoe, an actual loyal NWBO long who has purchased his own shares and is simply trying to make a nice chunk of money back on them by temporarily lending them out:


Cult members towards Linda Powerless, a CEO/CFO/dictator who has never purchased her own NWBO shares and constantly sells them to shorts and MMs in order to raise cash to pay her salary and the CDMO she owns:
icon url

dennisdave

03/03/25 11:32 AM

#752248 RE: branster #752149

You sir are part of the problem, maybe its not naked shorts, but you are fueling shorts by allowing shares


I am lending and have lent all my shares, and at least made some money. Before you say anything. I don't give a rats freaking ass what you think
icon url

Steady_T

03/03/25 11:16 PM

#752357 RE: branster #752149

Oh good grief. The amount of legal shorts is minuscule compared to the OS.

If the naked short position exists, as many have claimed, the amount of shares borrowed from accounts is very small blip in the shorting effects.
If the naked short position doesn't exist, then the number of shares being lent out is minor compared to the ongoing shares being sold into the market by management.

This holier than thou argument is a tempest in a tea pot and a real waste of time. I believe the term is virtue signaling.