Actually Lurker, it is the MM's who, by selling naked, create the excess shares in the Market, and in doing so, create the need to call shares in Name Form.
Selling naked, churning, gives the illusion of volume and selling, it create excess naked shares in the market which work for the shortsellers to keep the price down. So, it isn't that the particular stock is worthless, the MM's have given the illusion that the stock is going down in value, when, in truth, its the naked shares in the market's impact upon the price of the stock.
To counter that, shareholders can demand their shares in Name form, in doing so, it puts pressure on the shortsellers to buy certifed shares to cover their naked short positions.
In the EUTO market, when shareholders demanded certs the price went from $.03 to $.25. Then a large shareholder sold off before his groups agreed selling point. This gave shortsellers certified shares to sell into the market enough to get the price to $.08-.09. Then 50MM shares were released into the float, ending any more hopes of a short squeeze.
Your argument about fundamentals is also wrong. If FAMH shareholders have the float in Name form, FAMH could be selling used chewing gum, and there would still be a squeeze, it's just math.
IMO, I believe you understand this, but are applying classic dump & pump mentality to scare investors and shake shares on behalf of shortsellers in the FAMH market.
Pugs |
