I keep seeing the same comments about reverse spli
Post# of 88576
(Total Views: 314)
Posted On: 11/27/2025 3:05:05 PM
I keep seeing the same comments about reverse splits and the share count, and I want to add a different perspective based on how real operating companies function.
Large companies do not reduce their share count to tiny numbers. They keep a large share structure because they use shares for mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, and equity based compensation. When you look at real Nasdaq and NYSE companies, many of them have hundreds of millions or billions of shares. They use those shares as tools to buy companies or merge with partners.
If you force a company down to a small float after a large reverse split, you eliminate that flexibility. A company with only two hundred million shares has far fewer options than a company with several billion shares. Dr. Dalton has said that there will be no reverse split, and I take him at his word. The current share count makes sense if the long term plan involves consolidation, integration, or strategic deals that use equity.
There is another point that often gets ignored. People keep dismissing the idea of Dr. Dalton’s private companies or assets being merged into UNIVEC, even though he has talked for years about rolling everything into one company. That dismissal does not line up with the way he speaks publicly.
When Dr. Dalton posts, he speaks as if UNIVEC is already an operating company. He says things like “Univec would like to announce the integration of AI” or “Univec is focused on improving patient outcomes.” The OTC entity has not released any filings that show an AI platform, patient systems, or operating infrastructure. If UNVC already had those capabilities, shareholders would have received a formal notice or update. The OTC would also need to be informed of a business change.
Since none of that has happened, the logical conclusion is that he is referring to private operations or a separate active entity that will merge into the UNVC shell. He speaks as if the combined company is already real, which supports the idea of a future roll up or reverse merger where his private assets become part of UNIVEC.
Some people refuse to consider this possibility. They overlook the private side completely, even though it is consistent with how he talks and with the larger share structure. A company that plans to integrate multiple entities or technologies needs a wide share base, not a narrow one.
These are the reasons I do not buy the recurring narrative that a reverse split is the only outcome or the only realistic path. The language Dr. Dalton uses, the share structure, and the way large companies operate all point in a different direction.
Large companies do not reduce their share count to tiny numbers. They keep a large share structure because they use shares for mergers, acquisitions, joint ventures, and equity based compensation. When you look at real Nasdaq and NYSE companies, many of them have hundreds of millions or billions of shares. They use those shares as tools to buy companies or merge with partners.
If you force a company down to a small float after a large reverse split, you eliminate that flexibility. A company with only two hundred million shares has far fewer options than a company with several billion shares. Dr. Dalton has said that there will be no reverse split, and I take him at his word. The current share count makes sense if the long term plan involves consolidation, integration, or strategic deals that use equity.
There is another point that often gets ignored. People keep dismissing the idea of Dr. Dalton’s private companies or assets being merged into UNIVEC, even though he has talked for years about rolling everything into one company. That dismissal does not line up with the way he speaks publicly.
When Dr. Dalton posts, he speaks as if UNIVEC is already an operating company. He says things like “Univec would like to announce the integration of AI” or “Univec is focused on improving patient outcomes.” The OTC entity has not released any filings that show an AI platform, patient systems, or operating infrastructure. If UNVC already had those capabilities, shareholders would have received a formal notice or update. The OTC would also need to be informed of a business change.
Since none of that has happened, the logical conclusion is that he is referring to private operations or a separate active entity that will merge into the UNVC shell. He speaks as if the combined company is already real, which supports the idea of a future roll up or reverse merger where his private assets become part of UNIVEC.
Some people refuse to consider this possibility. They overlook the private side completely, even though it is consistent with how he talks and with the larger share structure. A company that plans to integrate multiple entities or technologies needs a wide share base, not a narrow one.
These are the reasons I do not buy the recurring narrative that a reverse split is the only outcome or the only realistic path. The language Dr. Dalton uses, the share structure, and the way large companies operate all point in a different direction.
(6)
(0)