I am not an expert on the subject, but I appeal to my sense of logic. If GoTraq preserves the stock structure after the 100:1 performed. Adding to this the first year operation budget sales planned by Gregg Sullivan and the last two reports I have published; all make that first budget can be exceeded even several times. As we know, this project has already given concrete proof that put on offer or consideration, the response of the interested parties far exceed the expectation of the same answer.
My estimates are business continues to retain the same prospects. If you reduce the number of shares 100:1 the potential price occurs backwards 1:100
What will be the price-per-share strategy of the new owners?
It is part of the experience of this project to have been attacked mercilessly from its low-priced share profile.
This is striking because in addition it has been an insistent attack work even in months where the activity has been null. Even though the project seemed to have gone to closure or failure
One way to avoid this enormous vulnerability would be for the new owners, to bet on a strategy of high price per share
While the expectation of stock purchases is of a huge volume, having a low price for them would make it easier for the saboteurs to set up a price attack strategy, and I have no doubt that they have already been well calculated from a long time ago. Of course, an aggressive and massive tendency to buy sweeps any attempt to sabotage the price down. But if the cost of sabotage is low, then the determination has been proven enough in the sabotage.
A high-priced strategy would greatly help these saboteurs to be prevented by the high cost of sabotage losses
Some companies I observed, they do not like that the price of their participation is very high. They prefer that it be reasonably low to democratize in the volume of exchange the transaction of the day to day. It is also a way of protecting themselves against medium and strong enemies for whom it would be even more difficult for them to take over the company by way of buying a high percentage of their shares.
A strategy based on high price could well make this project a BOOM in the market. The business potential is enormous. And the stock structure is very low
It is common for those who operate price strategies and shareholding structures in companies, they do not care about the consequences that derive from the holders of shares. They look with considerable disregard to this sector of shareholders. And this is a very frequent phenomenon in the market exchanges. It is precisely because Market Markets are so scary and we all know that in general this represents a high risk.
So I recognize the price strategy runs for both directions. Something new owners will have to measure along the way. However, I estimate in this case there are no great enemies. And yet I believe that the project has to tread on keys of great interests already positioned
Because that's the rule. A completely upside-down behavior by the company towards its shareholders would represent a HIGH IMPACT ON POSITIVE within Bloggers and market opinion experts. It would represent a TRUST TRUST for all stakeholders, invest in a company that CARES AS ASSETS in its shareholders.
My estimates are business continues to retain the same prospects. If you reduce the number of shares 100:1 the potential price occurs backwards 1:100
What will be the price-per-share strategy of the new owners?
It is part of the experience of this project to have been attacked mercilessly from its low-priced share profile.
This is striking because in addition it has been an insistent attack work even in months where the activity has been null. Even though the project seemed to have gone to closure or failure
One way to avoid this enormous vulnerability would be for the new owners, to bet on a strategy of high price per share
While the expectation of stock purchases is of a huge volume, having a low price for them would make it easier for the saboteurs to set up a price attack strategy, and I have no doubt that they have already been well calculated from a long time ago. Of course, an aggressive and massive tendency to buy sweeps any attempt to sabotage the price down. But if the cost of sabotage is low, then the determination has been proven enough in the sabotage.
A high-priced strategy would greatly help these saboteurs to be prevented by the high cost of sabotage losses
Some companies I observed, they do not like that the price of their participation is very high. They prefer that it be reasonably low to democratize in the volume of exchange the transaction of the day to day. It is also a way of protecting themselves against medium and strong enemies for whom it would be even more difficult for them to take over the company by way of buying a high percentage of their shares.
A strategy based on high price could well make this project a BOOM in the market. The business potential is enormous. And the stock structure is very low
It is common for those who operate price strategies and shareholding structures in companies, they do not care about the consequences that derive from the holders of shares. They look with considerable disregard to this sector of shareholders. And this is a very frequent phenomenon in the market exchanges. It is precisely because Market Markets are so scary and we all know that in general this represents a high risk.
So I recognize the price strategy runs for both directions. Something new owners will have to measure along the way. However, I estimate in this case there are no great enemies. And yet I believe that the project has to tread on keys of great interests already positioned
Because that's the rule. A completely upside-down behavior by the company towards its shareholders would represent a HIGH IMPACT ON POSITIVE within Bloggers and market opinion experts. It would represent a TRUST TRUST for all stakeholders, invest in a company that CARES AS ASSETS in its shareholders.
1
