horst
4 years ago
I have no idea what's going to happen here - these all play out differently, and they're a patience game, the low floaters especially. There's no easy off-ramp when trading in early-stage low float custodianships - you just have to wait it out and see what happens. With any custodianship, it could be weeks, months, or over a year. I get a small position in all the low-float custos I can find if I can get in on the ground floor - some work out, others don't. I'm out of the habit of posting very often on any board unless there's something factual to report (court update, filing, etc.) so I'm going to leave it at that until there's an update on the stock....
GLTA!
H
horst
4 years ago
Most custodians don't tweet about their business at all - the "king of SPACs" David Lazar never lets a word out about any of his custodianships outside of court documents and filings with NVSOS, SEC, and OTC Markets. It's frankly better not to discuss pertinent information about stocks on twitter unless one has filed with the SEC to indicate that publicly available information will be made available on social media. Lots of companies and custodians are fudging this regulation and there's been very little enforcement, but really it's best to let the filings do the talking.
That said, Omni was very active on twitter and stocktwits for several weeks and then hasn't had anything to say about any tickers at all since May 4th - that's just a week, so it doesn't seem like a big deal.
horst
4 years ago
Well, if you look closely at the fundamentals -- especially debt -- of OTC-traded companies, you'll find that clean shells usually have the best balance sheets in pink sheets by a mile. They might not have any revenue, but they're not saddled with millions of dollars in insurmountable toxic debt. As I'm sure you know, pink sheet stock pumpers often use *revenues* outside the context of profitability to come up with wildly inflated valuations, pretending that such valuations are based on fundamentals, when they're clearly not: a company losing millions a year that's just a share selling scam has terrible fundamentals regardless of revenues.
I'd say maybe one out of 500 OTC stocks at best is anything resembling profitable. Old shells like CHME, where the debt is probably invalid due to the statute of limitations expiring, are among the only OTC stocks with potential of a good company coming in and adding value. It's not the norm, but it does happen. But ironically enough, the rare profitable reverse merger companies in the OTCs are often scrutinized for their fundamentals (i.e. "they only made $50,000 in profits this quarter" - BZW* is a good example of this) while train wreck companies with endless millions in convertible debt get higher valuations due to hype/pumps and nothing more. It's all a cesspool, but I do find that clean shells are appealing exactly because they have the chance to start anew with that rare good company that might reverse merge into the shell... Just my opinion...
H
horst
4 years ago
Yes, custodian applicants have to be shareholders, but typically if there's front loading of common shares it happens more than a few days before an application.
The custodian sometimes, not always, winds up with the conrol bloc and sells it. Yes, custodians can make a lot of money doing this if the custodianship is successful and if they're able to bring the company current and sell the shell. If there are problems with the shell, their investment in legal, court, and accounting fees is all for nothing. They're far from risk free. Custodians don't give away preferred stock though - a typical clean shell costs the incoming company between $150,000 and $250,000 in cash. Then the formerly private company, which is going public through a publicly traded shell, will grant shares to its stakeholders in the formerly private company. This just makes sense - they're not bringing their private company into the shell just for the benefit of legacy shareholders of the shell.
I don't understand your last question - custodianship stocks are like any other stocks: the price goes up when there are more buyers than sellers, and it goes down when there are more sellers than buyers.