"He said he was worried about the price dropping i
Post# of 36536
(Total Views: 133)
Posted On: 12/04/2019 6:57:12 PM
"He said he was worried about the price dropping in half from the dividend."
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/newpost/622...z67BWkGGfq
From what I recall, he said the price would be cut in half and there would be 95 million shares outstanding that had to be chewed through. I don't think that's the same thing. The price should not have dropped by half since only about 55% of the shares were being awarded the dividend. If all the restricted shareholder were given dividend shares because of the CMF fiasco, then there would be 20 - 25 million more shares that had to be issued, and then yes, 100% of the outstanding shares would receive a dividend and the pps would be cut in half. I took that to be the meaning of what he was worried about.
"The market cap stays the same so it’s just math and the adverse effect on a hoped for uplisting."
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/newpost/622...z67BWfnlVO
We have seen the OTC plays fast and loose with the market cap. They just arbitrarily removed $70 million in MC when GNBT retired almost 21 million shares, and then on the two days where 55% of the shares were "supposed" to receive a dividend, they cut the opening price by 1/2 arbitrarily (automated) even though there was not going to be 2 times as many shares available. Yes, the pps went up from that halved opening price, but I would be willing to be there were traders that took advantage of that mistake and forced the price down on both 10/29 and 11/29 because of the way OTC incorrectly handled what was supposed to happen.
So market cap is "flexible" on the OTC - not so much on the NAS or DOW.
Can you imagine the uproar if Apple stated they were giving 25% of their shareholders a 1:1 dividend (for whatever specious reason anyone can come up with) but the day of the dividend, the price went from $200/share to $100 per share? The MMs, the brokerages, the shareholders, the regulators and everybody else associated with financial dealings would be howling. I didn't hear one peep when OTC ignored the retirement impact on GNBT from anybody associated with trading, nor did I hear anybody question why many outlets showed the pps as halved for a dividend that was only going to 55% of the shareholders.
That is what we are facing here in OTC land, and to me, that is why Joe was so concerned. If they have to issue 20 - 25 million more shares, we're screwed because if they hold the market cap, the share price is cut in half. If they only give the dividend to 55% of the shareholders but OTC cuts the share price 50%, the MC takes an undeserved hit. Either way, we see an artificially manipulated share price and MC - NOTHING that resembles fair treatment of the value of the company based on anything they are doing or planning to do.
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/newpost/622...z67BWkGGfq
From what I recall, he said the price would be cut in half and there would be 95 million shares outstanding that had to be chewed through. I don't think that's the same thing. The price should not have dropped by half since only about 55% of the shares were being awarded the dividend. If all the restricted shareholder were given dividend shares because of the CMF fiasco, then there would be 20 - 25 million more shares that had to be issued, and then yes, 100% of the outstanding shares would receive a dividend and the pps would be cut in half. I took that to be the meaning of what he was worried about.
"The market cap stays the same so it’s just math and the adverse effect on a hoped for uplisting."
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/newpost/622...z67BWfnlVO
We have seen the OTC plays fast and loose with the market cap. They just arbitrarily removed $70 million in MC when GNBT retired almost 21 million shares, and then on the two days where 55% of the shares were "supposed" to receive a dividend, they cut the opening price by 1/2 arbitrarily (automated) even though there was not going to be 2 times as many shares available. Yes, the pps went up from that halved opening price, but I would be willing to be there were traders that took advantage of that mistake and forced the price down on both 10/29 and 11/29 because of the way OTC incorrectly handled what was supposed to happen.
So market cap is "flexible" on the OTC - not so much on the NAS or DOW.
Can you imagine the uproar if Apple stated they were giving 25% of their shareholders a 1:1 dividend (for whatever specious reason anyone can come up with) but the day of the dividend, the price went from $200/share to $100 per share? The MMs, the brokerages, the shareholders, the regulators and everybody else associated with financial dealings would be howling. I didn't hear one peep when OTC ignored the retirement impact on GNBT from anybody associated with trading, nor did I hear anybody question why many outlets showed the pps as halved for a dividend that was only going to 55% of the shareholders.
That is what we are facing here in OTC land, and to me, that is why Joe was so concerned. If they have to issue 20 - 25 million more shares, we're screwed because if they hold the market cap, the share price is cut in half. If they only give the dividend to 55% of the shareholders but OTC cuts the share price 50%, the MC takes an undeserved hit. Either way, we see an artificially manipulated share price and MC - NOTHING that resembles fair treatment of the value of the company based on anything they are doing or planning to do.
(0)
(0)Generex Biotechnology Corp. (GNBTQ) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼