Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Given the volume today I'd be surprised if they were still in the short. Borrowing at 9+ and buying back anywhere between 4.5 and 6.7 would be some hefty profit for 9 million shares, and given the volume today they certainly could've picked them all back up.
So let's say this was indeed fraud, and was proven to be fraud tomorrow.
We'll have clinical data, and possible uplisting, in a couple of weeks. Relax. Let's focus on our fractional jet ownership. ChetJets.
I mean if the drug works, then no, it won't impact it from a year. There wasn't really anything new in the piece. But it did reiterate some questions that still exist and are why it was a sub-$1 stock and trades OTC. Some of the stuff has seemingly been debunked but some of the corporate actions have been puzzling, to say the least.
I'd say it's be reassuring in that the drop in share price was almost totally opportunism on the part of some bad actors looking to capitalize on a situation to make money, rather than any inherent weakness in the company, the product, or the potential down the road. That would be good news.
For the same reason people get angry at the Don't Pass Line guy on the craps table. I agree, that it's no different than a guy pumping and dumping a stock like Portnoy. Probably trading out of a stock five minutes after he mentions it. But there is something more acceptable about it being from the long side.
I consider it manipulation because it's basically gaming the system. When you buy, you're generally hoping for increased returns in the future.
You’re not familiar with management are you?
Well I suppose it depends on what you consider pumping and dumping. Yes, there is a law against it. But just look on TWTR and you'll see tons of instances that I would consider pump and dump that don't get prosecuted. So I guess even if today's actions border on the illegal, what they could actually prove and prosecute remains to be seen. In my experience, a lot of this stuff doesn't seem to be prosecuted. I mean just look at bankrupt stocks on RH, I'd consider a lot of that pumping and dumping. But then again, the SEC seemed close to aiding and abetting the sale of worthless equity.
Agreed on the prosecution side. Not attempting to get into politics, but SEC strength in the current administration, or even the past few, just hasn't been there. Plus, proving fraudulent intent is tough. Have to be able to prove that the article included things the author didn't believe and was just published to drive the price down by misleading people. Also have to prove collusion in shorting I'd imagine. Seems like a tough job, especially when folks can coordinate over encrypted communication channels that aren't really accessible to regulators.
The SEC doesn't care. Anyone expecting them to take action will be disappointed.
No doubt. I mean I've been adding on the way up but fully expected something like this. If you truly understand and believe in the company, you do what Chet did and look at this as a chance to buy some on the cheap. I got FOMO a bit and honestly don't know if the stock will be above $10 in a year or below a $1. But if you truly believe in it, you just buy on these dips.
I honestly tried back then. I did. But my stupid online brokerage wouldn’t let me buy your stupid penny stock. SO HERE WE ARE.
Because they think they "earned" the 900% but the 40% drop was clearly someone else's fault
Because the idea of borrowing 9 million shares to orchestrate a bearish attack is much more of an abstraction. See all the questions above.
This man gets it.Because they think they "earned" the 900% but the 40% drop was clearly someone else's fault
I didn’t earn 2000+ percent, but I’m not posting sour grape posts like this because I didn’t invest.
“ if you're going to sleepthis late, you're going to miss a few minidramas.”
Well that is the important of getting uplisted and getting stronger hands and deeper pockets behind it. These guys can obviously do it more for smaller companies. Obviously harder to push around multi-billion dollar companies. I mean the short essentially caused $3bn in losses by my estimates. Usually investors this invested won't let this stuff happen. So from that perspective, kinda surprised today happened. I don't think Citron is that big. So if you can get a big fund behind it, they'll buy up any squeeze and push them around, causing a short squeeze.
I was joking - after today I have a cost basis of $0.18. I'm hoping this thing goes to 1000.
I have a feeling this is going to bounce around between $5.50 and $7.00 for the rest of this week. Could be quite volatile but I won't try and time highs and lows. #HODLING.
Stop losses are a pretty good idea usually, but as we saw can be victims of a stop run. I personally wouldn’t use a stop on OTC
I am simply not a fan of someone being able to use shares they don't own to drive down the share price while profiting millions in the process.
I'm not exactly sure if this is true but it's what I've been reading. If you put in a sell order for your shares at a price target, those shares are unavailable to be "borrowed" by a short seller. The short needs outstanding shares to borrow. If there aren't 9M shares to borrow, they wouldn't have the ammo to execute the bear raid.
