redwagon
1 week ago
Whatever it takes to increase interest and buying.
-Audit completed which will lead to ticker change and OTCQ? listing.
-Signed big kit deal(s)
-Merger or Partnership with a larger company
-Buyout by another company
I believe, as many do, that a short squeeze would cause a huge buying demand and increase the share price significantly. Maybe Dryworld is timing audit and big news to hit at the same moment to maximize the short squeeze.
Also a forward split would cause all shares owned to be accounted for. Doesn’t have to be a 2:1 split, could be just an 11:10 forward split. Then MM’s would have to give out more shares to holders and report all the shares to the SEC and show how many shares are out there. Imagine if there were 100,000,000 shares that over the last 10 years (or even the last 5) MM’s have sold on IBGR and not covered. A 2:1 split would force them to give another 100,000,000 shares out to all the holders of those shares and also declare their number of shares issued. It is possible that there are multiple times that in shares shorted over the last decade. MM’s win this game when a ticker goes to zero, and or reverse splits 1:1000 or 1:10,000. They never have to cover shorts
That is what we are all speculating may happen here. It is just taking a long time to show if it all will pan out.
JMHO
redwagon
2 weeks ago
MM’s don’t want the share price to rise, their algorithms eat up small buys under the ask. There is absolutely no selling at these price levels, so any buying has to be met with MM’s selling shares that don’t exist. For a stock with no selling and more buying, you would expect the share price to rise (simple supply and demand), but they skew the time proven fact of S&D, by falsely creating more supply to dampen the demand. They put up 1 million shares as a wall to convince everybody that IBGR is stuck and will never break through (.0095) to deter buying, and double down on that by selling below that line.
Pennyboy20
3 weeks ago
My point was this part of the article quoted from the article
“That said, we agree with the New York Stock Exchange and National Investor Relations Institute that there is a serious gap in the regulation of short sellers related to their disclosure obligations. We understand that well-functioning markets rely on transparency, so powerful players should not be allowed to hide in the shadows. Since we require large investors, who accumulate long positions, to publicly disclose their holdings, why aren’t there disclosure obligations for large short sellers?”
redwagon
3 weeks ago
There is not enough buying volume (even if you assume that MM’s are buying at all) to cover shares that MM’s sold to “Make the Market”.
1) OTC Pink MM’s are on a voluntary basis for reporting their short interest, the daily short trading is reported by transaction, but no one (especially the SEC) pays attention to the accumulative effect.
2) Why would OTC Pink MM’s ever buy back shares that they shorted? They can short any stock to zero with infinite share selling since 99% of pinkies need to be able to sell shares just to stay alive. If they drive the share price down with infinite share selling, they starve the company, and the company has to go out of business and abandoned the ticker.
3) When MM’s short a stock, they take the money from the sale and keep it. With the money only tied to the opening of a transaction, with no “covering” which would close the transaction, they don’t even EVER have to pay taxes on the gain. So just imagine all the defunct tickers that have billions and billions of shares that MM’s sold short that will never have a buyer again just moldering away while MM just keep the money tax free forever.
4) No matter how much traders, flipper, or investors get a stock on the OTC to run, the MM’s in 99%+ of cases, have the patience and resources to wait out the run and/or buy some shares back on a minisqueeze just to reshort the ticker again when the run peaks at much higher prices.
5) I believe that Dryworld is one of the companies that can break this pattern, but we need the audit first and foremost so we can be SEC reporting, then we need that to make the ticker change possible. At the same time, or soon after we need some real kit deals with real revenue, which would be a good time to maybe do a forward split to force MM’s to show their hands in terms of shares out there, or else to have to pony up shares to all the holders of shares they sold shares to. For example: do a 2:1 forward split so every share owned is now 2 shares. That would cause all the shares to be accounted for and MM’s to have to double the number of short shares the have out there. This would best be done at a time of share price strength to have the biggest impact. Remember there are only currently 244 million actual shares in the public float. I have a good faith estimate that many or most are accounted for. That means that of the tens of millions of shares bought in the last few months, there is no way that they are all shares sold by retail owners. They are shorted shares sold by MM’s. I think all the things we are ticked off about from Dryworld actually will help out in the long run because they really do make them look like a typical OTC company selling discounted notes and diluting the share structure. But remember we started with a ridiculously low share count 5 years ago, without a reverse split in about 12 years (which means all short shares over the past 12 years are still 100% vulnerable, not RS’d at a 1:10,000 ratio). What that means is Dryworld Reverse Mergered into IBGR probably looking at the share structure compared to others and realizing that at some point they had a built in short squeeze. JMHO