(Total Views: 469)
Posted On: 02/28/2020 11:11:49 PM
Post# of 72440
Since your argument is no investors on this board said they sold in the past two days therefore volumes must be fake, knowing the total amount of shares do matter IMHO. SP has been between 5 and 10 cents for a while. It’s not inconceivable to think traders (even some investors) who bought in that range decided to take a 100% profit. The total volume of the past two days were about 16M shares. It’s also not inconceivable to think that traders own about 7% of the total OS.
As for the rationale for voting to increase authorized shares, most shareholders really did not have a choice because if they vote no, IPIX could go bankrupt if OS reaches 300M and Leo could not raise any more money. Shareholders were caught between a rock and a hard place. If Leo was so confident about a deal with large upfront payment before OS reaches 300M, such voting would not be necessary.
If you followed certain famous impeachment trial recently, you should know that when the defense could not dispute the facts, they attacked the managers. My post about Aspire and the MFO sold ~100M shares is backed by SEC filings. You can argue that the 100M dilution was no major selling pressure, but you cannot argue that the MFO has not been selling due to the lack of Schedule 13G.
Mods, I requested Admin to review the two deleted posts I made earlier. If this post is off-topic, please let me know why so I can correct it.
As for the rationale for voting to increase authorized shares, most shareholders really did not have a choice because if they vote no, IPIX could go bankrupt if OS reaches 300M and Leo could not raise any more money. Shareholders were caught between a rock and a hard place. If Leo was so confident about a deal with large upfront payment before OS reaches 300M, such voting would not be necessary.
If you followed certain famous impeachment trial recently, you should know that when the defense could not dispute the facts, they attacked the managers. My post about Aspire and the MFO sold ~100M shares is backed by SEC filings. You can argue that the 100M dilution was no major selling pressure, but you cannot argue that the MFO has not been selling due to the lack of Schedule 13G.
Mods, I requested Admin to review the two deleted posts I made earlier. If this post is off-topic, please let me know why so I can correct it.
(3)
(3)
Scroll down for more posts ▼
