Rellee - corporate buybacks are governed differently than insider purchases. There is no blackout period needed for the corporation because by nature - buying back stock is generally a positive for ALL shareholders and it is understood that " lthe corporation" is always acting upon "inside news" to drive a repurchase. That being said - they are very limited to how much and when they can buyback. Generally it is 5-10% of avg daily volume for a 30 month period, can not buy 30 min after open and 30 min prior to close, and can not buy at the ASK. This prevents them from "manipulating " the price by overwhelming the ASK/driving up the price. Further - with the low % allowed to repurchase - they can n9t drive the price action. However, as they continue to purchase, daily volume does start to increase allowing them t9 continue to purchase more and more which eventually does cause an imbalance in supply and demand (assuming no one is dumping hard into the buyback). Insiders have a significantly more onerous time when it comes to "impropriety" and signaling intentions well in advance and using blackouts to avoid any appearance of impropriety.
Anyone that hasnt read the rules should look up the SEC rules to understand the mechanics. Because this stock is lightly held- the company would be hard pressed to buy back a significant amount of shares before the price was driven up and making the shares too expensive with limited cash. This is what several have referred to about likited effectiveness of a buyback.
As far as damage done by other board to company/stock - it seems extensive and expansive. Calling store owners, dealers, SMS, harassing and threatening them and posters, blatant lies, filing false PRa, etc. If $HJOE has hard evidence of this as was alluded to in suit - it could be a significant turning point in the trial/willingness to settle. KBM has the most to lose by far. While they need to fight back early so they dont put a big target on their back for other lenders to make the investment (in suing/counter suing), the ROI quickly tanks when the negative exp9sure and PRs begin to mount. Ket withHJOE and others is the cash flow/ability to fight back. Most companies have been so badly damaged by the toxic loans/shorting - they have no cash and worthless stock and thus no means to hire competent counsel. HJOE has a firm with extensive experience in this realm and unlike the Plaintiff - hasnt had a revolving door for their counsel.
Anyone that hasnt read the rules should look up the SEC rules to understand the mechanics. Because this stock is lightly held- the company would be hard pressed to buy back a significant amount of shares before the price was driven up and making the shares too expensive with limited cash. This is what several have referred to about likited effectiveness of a buyback.
As far as damage done by other board to company/stock - it seems extensive and expansive. Calling store owners, dealers, SMS, harassing and threatening them and posters, blatant lies, filing false PRa, etc. If $HJOE has hard evidence of this as was alluded to in suit - it could be a significant turning point in the trial/willingness to settle. KBM has the most to lose by far. While they need to fight back early so they dont put a big target on their back for other lenders to make the investment (in suing/counter suing), the ROI quickly tanks when the negative exp9sure and PRs begin to mount. Ket withHJOE and others is the cash flow/ability to fight back. Most companies have been so badly damaged by the toxic loans/shorting - they have no cash and worthless stock and thus no means to hire competent counsel. HJOE has a firm with extensive experience in this realm and unlike the Plaintiff - hasnt had a revolving door for their counsel.
5
