(Total Views: 307)
Posted On: 07/21/2018 3:56:14 PM
Post# of 43066
Re: Commando911 #39960
how nice you consider me an *expert* .. i'd just note i'm an observer of patterns myself ..
re: PTOI's abusive tally .. i'd say it's high .. probably no longer as large as the float but imo seriously up there
that said sans P2O executing .. the abusive short won't matter one iota
but i suspect you already know that ..
it's the terms that will matter *imo* re: the first sale .. that is why some fed up and exhausted longs took note of the detail of the MA with RC (master agreement) .. and indicated that kept them from selling out in total earlier this year .. which i totally understand
as to what happens to the SP .. imo there are very specific price points (which i've noted previously many times .. we both know PTOI has been kept @ 5c or below it since October 2014 .. London Calling done to *bury* the ACC Executive Summary's release .. among other *facts* ) that NR (non retail) has to deal with re: P2O's first sale .. which personally i hope is to RC .. but i won't begrudge another buyer being the first for P2O's tech
those price points remain 5c .. 10c .. 20c (minimal) .. 30c (major) .. efforts of Jan 2013 and approx where many original investors first bought (80c~) .. and of course where this last *round* initially kicked in back in 2012 .. (August/September) .. approx 1.10 to 1.50 .. it's all about how *handled* by NR
NR needs to get *liquidity* back into PTOI with mgmt's execution (that is why i watch *volume* avgs to see when *imo* manipulated* and how *marked* )
CEO has numerous options .. whether he undertakes any of them including the value of the almost decade long abusive short re: PTOI .. only he knows .. what i've always asked for is communication that is timely (clearly an issue that has yet to be resolved imo satisfactorily) .. again i've noted since the BoD was seated last October (about 18 months after current CEO indicated intent) that i remain invested due to RC's prior abilities .. the founder's retention of his 3M~ PTOI shares .. and years of interaction with a now BoD member who imo is the salt of the earth with all that that implies
again i understand venting and frustration .. but none of us *here* change one aspect .. as for the query from another *entity* as to my intent .. a GTC remains close to PTOI's 52 week low .. my CB (cost basis) in our personal acct remains @ sub 5c .. and while i have always recognized my risk/reward tolerance .. i have always believed in the concept of *diversification* ..
with *equities* some get hit out of the park .. some strike out early .. and others simmer for years until a catalyst triggers events
imo there isn't much *new* to discuss about P2O .. until the tech's first sell .. or the plant/blending site sell or another agreement is reached with another enterprise .. or a CFO gets hired .. or ______________ fill in the blank
perhaps it's just me .. but imo BoD hasn't infused monies for the fun of it .. maybe in the long run (EOQ/EOY) it will have been for naught .. i do not know .. what i do know is i respect the reasons why P2O remains (as of EOD Friday) an OTC Survivor .. and while i suspect the CEO doesn't understand the *asset* in play regarding almost a decade of *abusive* shorting .. other *investors* absolutely do ..
so we shall see what comes next .. 52 week low being reset .. or mgmt's input
as for your hypothetical .. i don't have enough info to be able to guesstimate what is best .. i'd certainly consider that option provided both parties benefit *long* term
imo it's really easy to do anything for a short term benefit .. but imo it's the vision .. tactics and strategies' utilized for the long term .. that matter .. imo P2O was literally almost a decade ahead of what is *reality* in play today for utilization
so have decisions been made or do they still need to be made? .. i do not know
if RC delivers .. it's a beginning but it's also opening another window of time in play .. i would like to believe .. all with interest will know within weeks ..
4kids
re: PTOI's abusive tally .. i'd say it's high .. probably no longer as large as the float but imo seriously up there
that said sans P2O executing .. the abusive short won't matter one iota
but i suspect you already know that ..
it's the terms that will matter *imo* re: the first sale .. that is why some fed up and exhausted longs took note of the detail of the MA with RC (master agreement) .. and indicated that kept them from selling out in total earlier this year .. which i totally understand
as to what happens to the SP .. imo there are very specific price points (which i've noted previously many times .. we both know PTOI has been kept @ 5c or below it since October 2014 .. London Calling done to *bury* the ACC Executive Summary's release .. among other *facts* ) that NR (non retail) has to deal with re: P2O's first sale .. which personally i hope is to RC .. but i won't begrudge another buyer being the first for P2O's tech
those price points remain 5c .. 10c .. 20c (minimal) .. 30c (major) .. efforts of Jan 2013 and approx where many original investors first bought (80c~) .. and of course where this last *round* initially kicked in back in 2012 .. (August/September) .. approx 1.10 to 1.50 .. it's all about how *handled* by NR
NR needs to get *liquidity* back into PTOI with mgmt's execution (that is why i watch *volume* avgs to see when *imo* manipulated* and how *marked* )
CEO has numerous options .. whether he undertakes any of them including the value of the almost decade long abusive short re: PTOI .. only he knows .. what i've always asked for is communication that is timely (clearly an issue that has yet to be resolved imo satisfactorily) .. again i've noted since the BoD was seated last October (about 18 months after current CEO indicated intent) that i remain invested due to RC's prior abilities .. the founder's retention of his 3M~ PTOI shares .. and years of interaction with a now BoD member who imo is the salt of the earth with all that that implies
again i understand venting and frustration .. but none of us *here* change one aspect .. as for the query from another *entity* as to my intent .. a GTC remains close to PTOI's 52 week low .. my CB (cost basis) in our personal acct remains @ sub 5c .. and while i have always recognized my risk/reward tolerance .. i have always believed in the concept of *diversification* ..
with *equities* some get hit out of the park .. some strike out early .. and others simmer for years until a catalyst triggers events
imo there isn't much *new* to discuss about P2O .. until the tech's first sell .. or the plant/blending site sell or another agreement is reached with another enterprise .. or a CFO gets hired .. or ______________ fill in the blank
perhaps it's just me .. but imo BoD hasn't infused monies for the fun of it .. maybe in the long run (EOQ/EOY) it will have been for naught .. i do not know .. what i do know is i respect the reasons why P2O remains (as of EOD Friday) an OTC Survivor .. and while i suspect the CEO doesn't understand the *asset* in play regarding almost a decade of *abusive* shorting .. other *investors* absolutely do ..
so we shall see what comes next .. 52 week low being reset .. or mgmt's input
as for your hypothetical .. i don't have enough info to be able to guesstimate what is best .. i'd certainly consider that option provided both parties benefit *long* term
imo it's really easy to do anything for a short term benefit .. but imo it's the vision .. tactics and strategies' utilized for the long term .. that matter .. imo P2O was literally almost a decade ahead of what is *reality* in play today for utilization
so have decisions been made or do they still need to be made? .. i do not know
if RC delivers .. it's a beginning but it's also opening another window of time in play .. i would like to believe .. all with interest will know within weeks ..
4kids
Quote:
Isn’t that always their goal? Tell me, in your expert opinion, what’s the amount of shares you feel are illegally shorted, and what do you expect will happen to the SP in numbers if a deal is announced. Which I seriously doubt will happen.
Also, do you think that giving the processor away, to any customer willing to invest the money to repair it, is a good idea in return for a percentage of the profits made on all fuel sales?
(3)
(0)
