News Focus
News Focus
icon url

CdoubleU

09/09/10 4:19 PM

#11310 RE: sssneo #11308

I'm going to have to agree with you on that one. Just feels like someone (large share holder perhaps) is trying to "shake the tree" of weak hands to try and accumulate shares. That's what it looks like . . . I'M HOLDING!
icon url

selfish burrito

09/09/10 4:26 PM

#11312 RE: sssneo #11308

Well diluting by definition is done by the company, as they're pulling shares out of thin air to sell, i.e. "watering down/diluting" it. It could be someone else dumping shares, but what convinced me that it was dilution is how much it went down after the spike the week of the fight/"launch." Who would sell days before the company had the potential to go up thousands of percent after a successful online gaming launch? The company itself was the only one with something to gain from selling then, AND they were the only ones that knew at the time that the launch was going to fail.

And I don't really blame them for diluting and not telling us if they're investing the money in something that will pay off, but I don't want to be in that number while they're doing it.
icon url

Alamo_on_the_rise

09/09/10 5:08 PM

#11317 RE: sssneo #11308

Check the financials my friend and you'll clearly see the 10M shares that were added and liquidated. That is clear proof of dilution. This stock clearly reflects selling pressure all the way down and it's those given shares (IR) and the company (diluters) who are the cause for the continued drop. Well, that and angry, disgruntled shareholders who are forced to sell at a loss because of the continued dilution.