Appearances. In April, a number of private investors are assembled (as they should be to provide cash). They are told a glowing story of the future (some of them probably long term friends, acquaintance and early investors that did well on the ramp to $50 in early 2000). Within three months a barrage of releases, then $3.6 MM from employees (loan "repayment" and "forced" conversion of options). It could all be coincidence, but I have seen such coincidences too often in the past. I "predicted" such denouements for MVIS and MU in early 2000, seeing there the same pattern that I have seen before. In early August, at $5, the April investors can cash in (not a bad return for three months of uncertainty)and few months later (November I believe) they get back in at $1.90. Since history has a way of repeating itself, why not conclude a similar run will be coming soon. The timing, just follows my general map for the Naz, developed quite independently of what happens to WAVX. The strategy laid out assures that a stop gets people out with about 10% or so loss at worst with a potential for a triple bagger in six months. Why is it wrong to conduct such an analysis of a potential development and capitalize on it?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
