Replies to post #65230 on SK3 Group Inc. (SKTO)

[Yo-Tocaré]

This is the best post to date. You rock sir. This should be a sticky.

[Tadaaa]

Nice Post !!

[JohnKnowsIt]

Quality work in this report!!! Just give me until after the end of the fun run to read through it all.... always good stuff you produce for us and it is much appreciated. Now I will sit back and enjoy the duck and cover...

[0001]

Good thinking, in the back of my mind i was thinking the same about the pps not changing, but too good to be true, dont want to put my hopes up that high. Id like it to be a surprise if it happened lol

[TenKay]

These valuations never, ever cease to entertain.

[janice shell]

if this was a ”normal” or ”regular” 3-1 forward split… we would be getting ”3” shares of ”SKTO” for every ”1” share of ”SKTO” that we purchase.

Instead… we are getting ”3” shares of ” Medical Greens” for every ”1” share of ”SKTO” that we purchase as indicated within the news below:

That is a distinction without a difference. Sheesh. It's a REVERSE MERGER. Whose stock would you EXPECT to get.

And to cut to the chase, there will not be a short squeeze, just as there are never short squeezes in connection with these kinds of corporate actions. SKTO has never been on the Reg SHO list, and short interest is negligible.

there just might be a chance that although we will see a ”share adjustment” in our SKTO positions by an increase of shares ”3-times” the amount we own, we ”might not” see a ”price adjustment” of a decrease by ”3-times” the amount post forward split as what we would usually see...

WHAT??? Of course you will. That is how it works.

I think that this will be kind of like an ”Initial Public Offering (IPO)” where if SKTO could show justification in revenues or contracts to justify a value where such ”zero sum” transaction is not required, then the SEC just might allow the closing price of SKTO on the date that the forward split takes place to either remain the same or even be allowed to open up higher and not have the price of SKTO reduced 3-fold.

Are you SERIOUS?? The transaction contemplated is nothing like an IPO. It's a REVERSE MERGER, and it will work like every other reverse merger penny stocks do. By the way, the SEC does not like reverse mergers, generally speaking.

And by what conceivable market mechanism could that happen?

Sure. If the company becomes successful and starts bringing in money, then the stock price will go up. That's not exactly news. But as for the rest, I am as usual shaking my head.

[stockfinder2012]

stervc: Not post. By definition, treatise! Amazing work of DD and analysis. Explores new territory (MG as de facto IPO) with eye-opening implications for MG stock price when MG opens for trading. Makes strong case for holding/buying pre-split shares. The last section shows astonishing examples of forward split stocks (before and after). And there's a whole lot more to find there. Read it for yourself and decide. It's time well spent.

Nicely done, stervc.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=89444464

skto

[newjackcity]

holy shit man. As always, thanks again. youre a positive force here.

[LAgirl33]

Post of the day!!! Everyone should read this!

[BBoat]

Great post. It's a shame that you are limited to only one post a day here.

[stocks-are-me]

Good Job Stervc !!!

[eddymacc]

Thanks for taking the time to post this stervc. Awesome news for an awesome company.

[winningman]

Thank you for all your hard work. The forward split only makes sense, as you pointed out, if they have big announcements with proof, to justify big growth into the future. Here's hoping the news will blow our minds sending us to your .59 pps. That would be life changing for a lot of people. Go SKTO!

[Sooah]

Sterling,

Reading this half way, you had my head shaking...I will offer one comment though:

The Marble Theory
...

A company would create an increase in ”demand” for marbles by increasing the ”supply” of marbles by splitting the boulder into 3 smaller marbles so that parent's would be able to afford them. By the company not doing so, only that one kid would be happy with his boulder and would be forced to play alone and the company would have far less of a customer base interested in buying marbles therefore decreasing the growth of the company. After experimenting with that one boulder, you now should see the anticipated growth from its management's view of future potential.

If I have read all of the forum DD correctly and the justification as to why SKTO is already a leader in this space with no peer, it is no different than stating that they compete in a monopolistic market, correct?

If that is the case, this marble theory makes no sense as there is no supply curve in a monopoly. There is no need to create demand by increasing supply. Also, increasing supply does not necessarily increase demand either. What it does is, it allows the stock/product to find a clearing price (aka equilibrium) and often times this is a phenomenon that occurs by lowering price. This ultimately moves quantities/volume and is a strategy that is employed when volume or quantity competition is in place.

If SKTO were the leader in this space, demand, hence also price should ultimately be controlled and dictated by SKTO/Medical Greens, Inc.

Thanks and best to all,

[CGardener]

where do you get this stuff? the SEC has nothing to do with/no say over what price MG/SKTO opens.


"I think that this will be kind of like an ”Initial Public Offering (IPO)” where if SKTO could show justification in revenues or contracts to justify a value where such ”zero sum” transaction is not required, then the SEC just might allow the closing price of SKTO on the date that the forward split takes place to either remain the same or even be allowed to open up higher and not have the price of SKTO reduced 3-fold. "

[Intothefuture]

Nice work. That's awesome.

[CGardener]

if this was a "normal" 3 for 1 forward split there wouldn't be a share exchange involved and your ownership percentage of the company wouldn't change. but here SKTO holders won't own the whole combined MG/SKTO pie, will they? MG has shares outstanding too. those don't disappear in that merger, do they? (that would be a neat trick). so how much will SKTO shareholders get in the combined company? and who decided that ratio?

[glens0]

Sterling awesome post. Makes me want to get back into SKTO. Thanks

[BettingAngles]

WoW-Great Post.. Thanks so much for the obvious effort put into the research.. Again.. Awesome.. GLTA

[MountainHigh]

Thanks stervc...Pretty much covers the entire history and brings us current. I can't imagine how great this will look at 7 months!!!

[my2Mustangs]

Maybe the "date of record" for the FS will be in the next PR, would that be #2 or #3.

They seem to like doing at least 3, when 1 or 2 would work better in oh so many ways.

Still waiting on the third PR about the dividend shares, maybe they'll give a solid date for that to happen or maybe that will be in the fourth PR about the dividend and the third will be an update that "the process for the dividend has begun."

[gman5287]

Awesome post!

[PLUTUS]

LMFAO, so this pink POS needs a lower price and more shares to dilute with?

Moreover, there is no gain whatsoever in any kind of split.

[buggs]

Sterling... EXCELLENT, WELL THOUGHT OUT POST! Everyone should read this!

buggs

[KathyBMR]

Thank you Sterling!!!

[Jack_Ryan001]

As always... Showing up with the real story & painting a picture for all to see.

I love your contributions to the board Sterling, PLEASE keep it up!

[0001]

Very humble in your thoughts, not always thinking you are 100% right all the time like some.

[The_Pro]

Dear Stervc,

Somehow I am missing something in regards to this being an "effective" dividend of only 33%.
After the hypotheical IPO of 3 shares (MDGR) @ the original SKTO price, investors would have 3 times their money. This is an increase of 200%.

I see the divy from this IPO as 200% (if it happens) and not 33%.

You can pm me and I'll relay the answer to the board.

Thanks

[terry_mathews]

Your references cited relative to a split are OTCBB companies meaning they came in fully reporting. Not the case with SKTO. And how do those cited compare to the norm for pink sheet splits executed? presenting outliers is like cheating.

Your references came in clean and were executing a split independent of other corporate actions. SKTO is coming in with a split while engaging in a highly dilutive but unreported merger agreement (unless you are foolish enough to think Medical greens comes in with no ownership stake and will give up their business for nothing).

[Dehnsum]

Bravo!