livinginstyle, otcshortreport says that 36% of the volume yesterday was short. According to your explanation, 210K shares were sells (since every sell is a short, right?) and the rest (364K) must have been buys at the ask, right? so am I to conclude that with 364K buys and 210K sells (that's more buys than sells) yesterday, the pps went down from .017 to .015?
but wait, the example from 2 days ago gets even more interesting...according to otcshortreport.com, only 10K was short and thus 182.8K were buys, right? That's according to your explanation of every sell being a short till it settles. So am I to conclude that with 182.8K buys and only 10K sells, the pps went down from .019 to .017
so to summarize, the pps went down from .019 to .015 on 546K buys and 220K sells...is this what we are to believe?
FACT is: there is an entity...a short position, who wants to see HHSE pps go down and it would be devestating to that shorts interest to have to cover on a huge run up...thus the volume is composed of 3 portions...buys, sells and shorts. The reason the pps goes down on such low volume is because the cummulative efffect of the sells + shorts exceeds the number of shares bought. simple as that...I don't know why the official short reports on naz or otc son't show the real short numbers and give the impression there is no short in the stock, but the numbers (and the L2 action) tells me otherwise...if one watches CSTI show up with a 10K or a 50K on a lowered ask, and get ask-slapped without any decrease in the number of shares on that ask, one would know that there is someone playing walkdown games...the good news is that shorts will need to cover...fueling the inevitable run up...