>>Plus her OCD which forces her into narrow-minded arguments on tiny little details that have no meaning or relevance whatsoever to the broader discussion.<<
Again, if you believe this is OC behavior, then why do you engage in it? Because you can't help yourself?
Or does your role as one-man-PR firm for GORO require you to?
>> Not going to enable your OCD any more on this subject.<<
I'm other words, you know that I'm right.
Don't sweat it, amedaus. You example proved that you agree with me.
Also, it's hilarious that you trade me post for post and then claim that I'M ocd.
"I think the problem here is you assume alot and your an @#$%."
The @#$% is the more important part. Plus her OCD which forces her into narrow-minded arguments on tiny little details that have no meaning or relevance whatsoever to the broader discussion.
>>And I don't read all the posts on the message board<<
OK, fine. Pretend that you didn't read amedaus' example which demonstrates that I'm right about this issue.
>> I only care about Goro's position. And they have a small share count and a low float.<<
Floats matter. Share counts don't. You should just stick to that.
I think the problem here is you assume alot and your an as-wipe.
"The size of the float is definitely an important issue with respect to trading dynamics. But company's with low share counts can most certainly have a large float and company's with high share counts can have a small float."
I never said that can't be the case. I only care about Goro's position. And they have a small share count and a low float. Which I feel will benefit them.
And I don't read all the posts on the message board "It's not my job" unlike you.
>>Nobody here on this board has been arguing that 53 million shares in and of itself means something. <<
Ha ha. Yes, you've been doing exactly that. You always boast about the company's tight share structure. You boast that the company only has 53 million shares outstanding. You boast about it as if the company would be a worse investment if it did a 1 for 6 forward split and suddenly had a 300 million share count.
If that happened, would you still boast about the company's tight share structure, amedaus?
Your refusal to answer this question is proof that I'm correct. You refuse to admit that this company would be no different even if it had 300 million shares outstanding.
>>Company ABC made $20 million last quarter. Of course that number, in and of itself, is meaningless,<<
It certainly matters if the company made $20 million versus $100 million. I can absolutely tell you that $100 million is better than $20 million without knowing ANYTHING else about the company.
But you can't tell me that 50 million shares outstanding is better than 300 million shares outstanding. GORO would be the same company with 300 million shares (post 1 for 6 split) than it is with 50 million shares.
Face it. I'm absolutely right about this. This is a loser argument for you.
"I'm claiming that the actual share count itself is meaningless."
With the above statement, each individual metric in evaluating any company is meaningless in and of itself. Wow, now that's a real brainiac kind of revelation you have going on there, little Natash.
Company ABC made $20 million last quarter. Of course that number, in and of itself, is meaningless, without knowing how that number has changed from the previous quarter, from the previous year's same quarter, how many shares are outstanding, how that number compares to its peers etc. Gee, does anybody out there evaluate a company on a single piece of metric in complete isolation from its context. No.
Typical of you to argue some completely narrow point of view.
Share count matters. Saying it doesn't over and over again will not change that fact. Nobody here on this board has been arguing that 53 million shares in and of itself means something. 53 million shares in the context of junior producing miners and how GORO got to that number is of huge value. But I guess your OCD is not allowing you to recognize that.
Too bad for you.
>>First off I didn't read his example.<<
Yes you did.
>>causing a small float<<
Stop confusing float with share count.
The size of the float is definitely an important issue with respect to trading dynamics. But company's with low share counts can most certainly have a large float and company's with high share counts can have a small float.
Reread my posts about this. I've repeated told the idiots not to confuse the float with the share count. Why do you keep doing it?
First off I didn't read his example. And I'm talking about a company that hasn't done a reverse split. Which you would be able to see in sec filings. So no not busted. Secondly I'm said it has a low share count and alot of the shares are accounted for causing a small float. Which good news would cause the stock to jump or go down at a faster pace then it would with a larger float. I'm not pumping it at all because it can go down just as quick. But I feel confident with the company and in this perticular case"Goro" having a low share count with a small float is going to have greater jumps in share price with the positive news I feel is on the way.