for all we know dahlman rose may have been behind the major shorting that took us down from 2.35 to .35... i'm not saying it's true, just that it could be. they certainly would have had a lot to gain by shaking out the .10 shares from the first private placement (at the time of the r/m).
i don't want to single out DR because anyone can operate in this fashion, but let's think in terms of big money's long term goals, and how it might serve their best interests to short the stock down from a short term top, and then accumulate a lot of shares from freaked out retailers who have no idea what's going on.
my theory turns a seemingly bearish downtrend into something very bullish. on more than one occasion, many traders around here have thought the stock sold off because someone changed their mind, decided they wanted to liquidate a large position, etc, but it's far more likely someone with a longer investment time frame wanted to make money on the short side and grab a larger position for less capital. fairly simple, and effective. jmho.
Trades can make money in both directions but since "we" can't short OTCs, there is a tendency to classify bears as "evil" as well as the bearish pressure they apply to the PPS.
A hedge position, or shorting against a block of shares that will become tradable at a later date is certainly a valid way to trade and if "correctly done" will make money.
I don't have a problem with it if that is what happened (we have no way to know right now). It will not change the fundamentals and is only a push (or shove) of the PPS away from the FMV. That volatility is exactly what makes OTCs so tradable since the market tends to balance eventually.
Reported earnings can push back in a big way so that is what I am hoping for.
IMHO edit- I see that we're all pretty much on the same page but expressing it differently, GLTA
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
