Thank you for your response. Somewhat surprisingly (to me at any rate), no one has yet commented on the implications of your response. If I understood your response correctly then among those you surveyed no one mentioned certificate requests in August which have not yet been fulfilled (though you did not specifically ask about delays). If all certificate requests made in August or previously have been filled, this may indicate a potential problem in the execution of any short squeeze. As you noted, your survey did not include foundation members but Andy Harrison said it well: "I think it is safe to assume that if our shares are getting certificates then others who have been requesting them will get them about the same time". In other words, there seems to be no a priori reason that certificate requests from foundation members would be filled any faster or any slower than those from non foundation members. Since certificate requests from the foundation presumably went in en masse around Aug. 22, 1997, it may well be the case that all or virtually all of those certificate requests have been filled. Why is that a problem? Well, lets do the math: If:
(1) All certificate requests placed on or about (or prior to) Aug. 22 have been filled,
(2) The foundation requested certificates for 2.1 million shares on or about Aug. 22 (and this is the figure from Riley G's posts shortly after the cartel "dropped the hammer" on the suspected large naked short position)
(3) There have been no subsequent sales by foundation members, and
(4) Riley's estimate of the public float (1.8 million) is correct,
then there are currently certificates held by individuals for 0.3 million more shares than are in the public float - a logical impossibility (or at least it seems so to me). If so, one or more of the four assumptions must be incorrect. If assumptions 2, 3 and/or 4 are the incorrect to any meaningful degree, given what I perceive as a current lack of momentum by the longs, a sucessful short squeeze appears problematical (IMO). Let me give you a few thoughts on each of the assumptions:
Assuption 1: All certificate requests placed around or prior to Aug. 22 have been filled.
For the failure of this assumption to be the sole explanation of the absence of a short squeeze to date there have to be at least 300,000 "foundation" shares acquired around or prior to Aug. 22 for which certificates have not been received. At least on SI, I can not recall any recent "war stories" about difficulties in receiving certificates from purchases in Aug. or early Sept. other than yours and Pugs (and I believe you are both in receipt of them now?) The post I am responding to seems consistent with this. Still on a percentage basis 300K is a relatively small percentage (14%) of 2.1 million. There is, however, a second related problem that also needs to be addressed: On Sept. 11, 1997, a little over two months ago, the count of shares in foundation hands was revised upward to just under 2.9 million in the following post:
exchange2000.com
If this figure is correct then subject to assumptions analogous to (2) through (4) there are approximately 1.1 million shares acquired by foundation hands about two or more months ago for which certificates have not been received (about 38% of the 2.9 million total). If one counts shares in non foundation hands for which certificates have been requested prior to Sept. 11, 1997 (assuming there are such) the percentage of shares in the form of requested certificates not received after two months is even greater. The size of this percentage makes it potentially testable right here on SI. Specifically, if 38% of foundation certificates requested prior to Sept. 11 have still not been received then around 38% of shareholders who requested certificates prior to Sept. 11 have not received them (though this isn't automatically true). If shareholders who post to SI are a representative sample it then follows that around 38% of them who requested certificates prior to Sept. 11 (whether foundation members or not) have not received them. I leave it up to you (the RMIL shareholders) as to whether and how you want to determine what the actual proportion is.
Assumption 2: The foundation held 2.1 million shares for which certificates were requested on or about Aug. 22
I have no comment on this one other than to point to two earlier posts which mention the 2.1 million figure:
exchange2000.com
exchange2000.com
The first of these two is one of many which gives the 2.1 million figure (actually 2.1 million plus) and the second is the first post that I am aware of that mentions the 2.1 million figure in conjunction with the term "foundation". (I can only find one earlier Riley G. post that mentions that term at all - but there may be more). It also indicates that certificates were requested on the 2.1 million foundation shares plus an additional 500,000 in non foundation hands.
Assumption 3: There have been no subsequent sales by foundation members.
I don't believe Riley has addressed this quantitatively (but I may be mistaken - I haven't read, let alone remembered, every single one of the 34,000+ RMIL/OVIS/OLPV posts! In any event if there is a post in which Riley specifies the number of shares sold by foundation members subsequent to Aug. 22, reposting it would IMO provide useful information.)
A number of previous posts have speculated over what anyone who was lucky enough to have a sizable OVIS stake purchased at an average price of around $0.20 did when the price hit much loftier levels (for example, north of $3.00 in the relatively recent past). Perhaps some or all would be tempted to ignore a 15+ bagger in favor of even bigger potential gains later on. Perhaps not... We will probably never know for sure.
Assumption 4: The public float is 1.8 million shares.
This of course is at the heart of much of the substantive discussion over the last few days. I applaud your (HRAKA) determination get the facts on this issue.
Miscellaneous Information:
The following Riley G posts may be germane to the issue of the number of certificates in NAME from. For brevity, I have given a capsule summary of the certificate count. However, links have been provided so that you can read the entire post:
Oct. 15, 1997: "To date we have received certificates in NAME form for a number between 1.2 million and 1.5 million for a public float between 1.6 and 1.8 million shares":
exchange2000.com
Oct. 20, 1997: "These requests are the CAVALRY's share requests and they total over 310,000 shares. Add that to our almost 1.3 million. This should be the straw that breaks this wide open. Plus there is another 46,000 shares being requested by another cartel(Founder) today. So we are hitting the new TA with some 356,000 shares to be converted this week.":
exchange2000.com
Oct. 20, 1997: "Psicop007: ... We have only 150k before the float is in all name form with 1 million NAME request behind that.":
exchange2000.com
You have noted on Nov.12, 1997 that "Oct. 24 was a very very busy day for the TA":
exchange2000.com
A few final comments.
Nothing I have written should be taken as a recommendation to take or fail to take any action of any kind with respect to this security. The opinions expressed here are solely my own.
I wish you success with your investments. |
