I keep seeing the same comments about reverse spli
Post# of 88576
(Total Views: 277)
Posted On: 11/27/2025 8:40:16 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.
I hear what you’re saying, but you skipped over the main point of my post. I’m not comparing UNVC today to Apple or Tesla today. I’m talking about how companies position themselves after they consolidate or merge assets. Dalton has talked for years about rolling everything into one company. That’s not something I made up. Those are his words.
And that’s where your argument always avoids the private side. You keep treating UNVC as if the OTC shell is the entire story and always will be. But whenever Dalton posts, he talks as if Univec already has patients, already has an AI platform, already has a fully functioning system. None of that appears in filings, so it clearly isn’t inside the public shell yet. If it was, he would be legally required to disclose it. That’s why people talk about private operations or a pending merger. It lines up with his language, whether anyone wants to believe it or not.
Also the $250M number you used is kind of arbitrary. You picked that number to make the math fit your conclusion. We have no idea what the full valuation would be if all of his private pieces were actually combined. You’re assuming the lowest scenario possible, which obviously leads to the lowest share price. That’s not a neutral assumption.
My point about the share count still stands. Large companies with long-term plans do not shrink their share structure down to nothing. They keep a wide base because that’s how they do acquisitions, partnerships, or equity deals. If Dalton intends to merge anything in, a tight 200M-share structure would make that harder, not easier.
You answered the part of the conversation that fits your narrative, but not the part about Dalton speaking as if Univec is already acting through another entity. That’s the piece you keep brushing aside, and that’s the part that makes people think something private is sitting off to the side waiting for the right timing.
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.
I hear what you’re saying, but you skipped over the main point of my post. I’m not comparing UNVC today to Apple or Tesla today. I’m talking about how companies position themselves after they consolidate or merge assets. Dalton has talked for years about rolling everything into one company. That’s not something I made up. Those are his words.
And that’s where your argument always avoids the private side. You keep treating UNVC as if the OTC shell is the entire story and always will be. But whenever Dalton posts, he talks as if Univec already has patients, already has an AI platform, already has a fully functioning system. None of that appears in filings, so it clearly isn’t inside the public shell yet. If it was, he would be legally required to disclose it. That’s why people talk about private operations or a pending merger. It lines up with his language, whether anyone wants to believe it or not.
Also the $250M number you used is kind of arbitrary. You picked that number to make the math fit your conclusion. We have no idea what the full valuation would be if all of his private pieces were actually combined. You’re assuming the lowest scenario possible, which obviously leads to the lowest share price. That’s not a neutral assumption.
My point about the share count still stands. Large companies with long-term plans do not shrink their share structure down to nothing. They keep a wide base because that’s how they do acquisitions, partnerships, or equity deals. If Dalton intends to merge anything in, a tight 200M-share structure would make that harder, not easier.
You answered the part of the conversation that fits your narrative, but not the part about Dalton speaking as if Univec is already acting through another entity. That’s the piece you keep brushing aside, and that’s the part that makes people think something private is sitting off to the side waiting for the right timing.
(5)
(0)