If the TA was lying it would be fraud. No matter if they worked out of a van down by the river or in the back of barber shop. It would be fraud. Period. Would they take that chance?
I have to give you a friendly correction on this. I have not second guessed any of my thoughts here with BEDA. There are some thoughts to where I think none of us are still really sure of, and won’t be, but I don’t think that it really matters now. I still believe in the post I had made below: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=47760997
I elected to move on from the issue because of two primary reasons.
First, I saw it better to have new investors seeing BEDA for its potential as a company and not as a short covering play. Short covering plays only pop and drop if substance from the company is never delivered.
Second, after further research after I had made the post, I realized that a short covering that would be given such attention before ever getting fully covered could be detrimental to those market forces responsible for implementing the mandatory forced buy-ins required by the SEC to cover FTDs. This is why I think it had to be subtle. I figured that a forced buy-in could have been happening right before our very eyes as indicative by the buying volume with no price movement to cover those FTDs before it receives too much attention.
The minimum FTD position needing to be covered where a buy-in needed to happen was potentially for 383,329,008 shares from what I had researched in the post above. From the info in that post, BEDA had traded 2,693,521,872 shares. Out of those 2,693,521,872 shares traded, there were many times where buying was going on where the price didn't move. They didn't allow for any major drop in price, but the price didn't move up either. In my opinion, the covering must have been happening right before our very eyes as out of those total 2,693,521,872 shares traded as evident of BEDA not being on the Reg SHO List anymore.
With BEDA not being on the Reg SHO List anymore, it simply means that that the mandatory buy-in was in effect to where 383,329,008 FTD shares (or whatever the number was) were covered somewhere along the line of the total 2,693,521,872 shares traded. I have seen often where the MMs don't allow for a stock to move from actual "Supply vs Demand principles until they have covered their FTD positions. Apparently, all FTDs are covered. I am expecting as I had seen you mention in one of your posts for BEDA to be traded more fairly which is only what the company was asking for before being shorted down to its previous lowest levels of trading. True buying volume should have a more relative effect on the share price now.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
