Posted On: 06/13/2014 4:44:51 PM
Post# of 43066
now you know why i can call for a partial cover of 20.00 to 40.00
just a reminder >> record setting *volume* by month for JBII
was the PROs' set up (pre WN) in April 2011
that was approx 8M
the trifecta/hat trick re: dolts complaint and 2nd hit piece was approx 7M
just imagine the *volume* that would ensue re:
CON side of version 1 >> entity have been remarkably efficient
at CONditioning by rote over a decade's+ *efforts*
to think of only one aspect >> a depressed PPS
(never the value of the abusive short itself)
of course until that project (former sec chair) gave the goods away (2007)
by actually acknowledging that yeppers abusive shorting did exist
(and version 1 CON side had to rewrite their *playbook*) it was
posted >> er >> *authoritatively* that nope .. no such thing existed
the value of 37M shares of JBII right now would be a PPS well above
that *line in the sand* @ 1.49
it's about to get interesting again
4kids
just a reminder >> record setting *volume* by month for JBII
was the PROs' set up (pre WN) in April 2011
that was approx 8M
the trifecta/hat trick re: dolts complaint and 2nd hit piece was approx 7M
just imagine the *volume* that would ensue re:
Quote:
what is the *value* of 37M to 62M JBII shares?
CON side of version 1 >> entity have been remarkably efficient
at CONditioning by rote over a decade's+ *efforts*
to think of only one aspect >> a depressed PPS
(never the value of the abusive short itself)
of course until that project (former sec chair) gave the goods away (2007)
by actually acknowledging that yeppers abusive shorting did exist
(and version 1 CON side had to rewrite their *playbook*) it was
posted >> er >> *authoritatively* that nope .. no such thing existed
the value of 37M shares of JBII right now would be a PPS well above
that *line in the sand* @ 1.49
it's about to get interesting again
4kids
(0)
(0)
