"Is this peggy? dj_ponder? really? you are no long
Post# of 22940
Posted On: 10/24/2016 11:46:00 AM
Re: Ragz2Richez #14231
"Is this peggy? dj_ponder? really? you are no long. just saying...."
that is correct - you are just saying. saying nothing. beat the drum. blow sunshine up the collective arses. and continue to say nothing.
bill is well aware of my holdings and specific, detailed frustrations and suggestions for the current IR group. he has also been made aware of others who have followed suit from the first shareholder to do so.
one could easily go back and look at the entirety of my posting over the last several years (here and on iLie before i quit posting/adding to their coffers) and know I am none of those. i have made it patently clear my issue is with shareholder communication coming from this IR group. the PPS decline is directly correlating to their emergence. now, whether that is cause and effect or a mix of factors (which is usually the case) can certainly be debated. however, there is simply no denying the fact that the PPS is decidedly DOWN and OS is UP since they came aboard. they took credit for spikes but took no credit for dips let alone long term decline. there is still no path to a $0.01 PPS target year end. i dont expect any specifics on the 26th release.
i have stated clearly on this forum that i do not believe they should be putting out PPS targets unless they can clearly effect the supply/demand balance to allow those targets to be achieved. the market determines the price and manipulation is rampant in the OTC. the only way to clearly drive a price forward in this realm to an intended target (and have any chance of KEEPING it there) is to dramatically decrease supply of shares (hence making all remaining shares more valuable due to scarcity).
it is just as easy (actually much easier due to my providing detailed reasons/models) for me to lump you in with the "pumpers"/IR as it is for you to suggest i am one of the paid bashers on iLie. works both ways. so - since you are the one making baseless claims - why dont you "prove" you are not just a "pumper" and provide an objective, specific pathway to how the PPS gets to $0.01 by EOY? i provided the rationale for how i dont see it being possible (based on market cap, revenues, increasing OS, realistic daily purchases by company/IR/FR based on revenue generation from the company and MRVB and limitations on buybacks per SEC R&R). so - please provide us your rationale for how it IS possible from a logistics standpoint and not that any given stock can increase 1000% in the OTC world on any given day. i and others have conceded that awhile ago and still maintain it is possible. however, getting there on a P&D and immediately crashing is somewhat disingenuous for IR when it should be about hitting PPS targets and MAINTAINING them.
that is correct - you are just saying. saying nothing. beat the drum. blow sunshine up the collective arses. and continue to say nothing.
bill is well aware of my holdings and specific, detailed frustrations and suggestions for the current IR group. he has also been made aware of others who have followed suit from the first shareholder to do so.
one could easily go back and look at the entirety of my posting over the last several years (here and on iLie before i quit posting/adding to their coffers) and know I am none of those. i have made it patently clear my issue is with shareholder communication coming from this IR group. the PPS decline is directly correlating to their emergence. now, whether that is cause and effect or a mix of factors (which is usually the case) can certainly be debated. however, there is simply no denying the fact that the PPS is decidedly DOWN and OS is UP since they came aboard. they took credit for spikes but took no credit for dips let alone long term decline. there is still no path to a $0.01 PPS target year end. i dont expect any specifics on the 26th release.
i have stated clearly on this forum that i do not believe they should be putting out PPS targets unless they can clearly effect the supply/demand balance to allow those targets to be achieved. the market determines the price and manipulation is rampant in the OTC. the only way to clearly drive a price forward in this realm to an intended target (and have any chance of KEEPING it there) is to dramatically decrease supply of shares (hence making all remaining shares more valuable due to scarcity).
it is just as easy (actually much easier due to my providing detailed reasons/models) for me to lump you in with the "pumpers"/IR as it is for you to suggest i am one of the paid bashers on iLie. works both ways. so - since you are the one making baseless claims - why dont you "prove" you are not just a "pumper" and provide an objective, specific pathway to how the PPS gets to $0.01 by EOY? i provided the rationale for how i dont see it being possible (based on market cap, revenues, increasing OS, realistic daily purchases by company/IR/FR based on revenue generation from the company and MRVB and limitations on buybacks per SEC R&R). so - please provide us your rationale for how it IS possible from a logistics standpoint and not that any given stock can increase 1000% in the OTC world on any given day. i and others have conceded that awhile ago and still maintain it is possible. however, getting there on a P&D and immediately crashing is somewhat disingenuous for IR when it should be about hitting PPS targets and MAINTAINING them.
(5)
(2)Trans-Pacific Aerospace (TPAC) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼