Replies to post #60026 on DD Support Board and Research Team

[BigBake1]

Nothing to calm down from, just pointing out the reality of it and it wasn't going to be sugar coated.. But you already knew that.

anyways, the volume spike has not just been in POT STOCKS, just look at daily volume totals at www.otcmarkets.com in the top right corner

10B, 15B 20B daily volume totals, last year 2B-5B was the norm.

but true a LOT OF $$$$ has been flowing into pot stocks, as long as there is a market for stocks that are not suspended and a quoted price by MM's through brokerage houses, it's ALL FAIR GAME!!!!!

Yes it has in FACT been due to POT stocks, yesterday for example:

22,149,446,830 total share volume on the OTC, of that 17% volume was in just TWO tickers both pot stocks. The top 10 volume leaders, 2 were not POT related and one has been touted as being pot related, leaving 7 no kidding POT related securities leading the way in share volume. The combined share volume of just those 7 leaders was in fact almost 33% just in the top 10 securities alone was due to POT. If you move the sample group out to the top 20 share volume leaders almost half of the volume recorded yesterday was POT securities.

There are currently 9788 securities quoted on the OTC Markets and yet only 15 or so POT related tickers recorded nearly half the share volume in yesterday's trading alone. There is no guessing needed when actual DATA is presented in reports.

The "banking" news was immaterial to the market, and has not changed a thing. But you are right it will get hyped as something that it is not and proof is the no less than 4 posts here linking to that story as if it jut opened the doors.

Once again no need to chill about anything, my point blank with no sugar coating of the FACTS bothers people, I get it. The only reason the OTC Markets still exist in this form is due to IGNORANCE, and there is plenty of unaware marks to go around.

[janice shell]

10B, 15B 20B daily volume totals, last year 2B-5B was the norm.

OTC volumes had been down for several years. Maybe it's an indication that small retail investors have more disposable income they feel they can spend on penny junk.

If so, maybe it's some kind of indicator of the state of the economy.

Or maybe not.