Thank you marr655. Interesting stuff in your first paragraph. Let's take into account that funds report quarterly. Fund data is, at worst, part of the fundamentals to review. But since you've taken a backward look at share shuffles by fundies, one fundamental by far-reaching review is debt. It has come down substantially. Another fundamental that has declined substantially is the price to sales multiple. Most will find 30 times sales as hyperbole but QTWW actually was valued that high years ago. I'd say long term on a speculative basis QTWW is a buy and worthy of one's long term investment. Regards!
Up 13.33% on volume of 15,474,959. High .072 low .059 open .065 close .071
Maybe your point is to see someone in error, leave them to their wrongdoing as if nothing happened. You must be some kind of parent, eh? As for the answer being "straightforward" it isn't actually. Fraudulent practices as a label without actual specifics and how they relate to SEC filing and those legalistic disclaimers, fraud and lies, as had been the assertion, that assertion is weak in proper context.
Therefore, nothing straightforward there. Questioning me as if I had condoned lying is out of line. Never in what I said was I condoning lying. Learn how to communicate.
Lying has become a widely accepted method. Go back to Nixon. Clinton, I should say Clintons are the masters of it. Not that you may care but the words strait and coin, as you are using them, completely incorrect. Now coin may be a typo but strait, not so.
we see how that turned out. I can't even guess who's pumping SAPX. CAREFUL! Don't think this is me spamming that pink sheet garbage. It's an example of boiler room activity is all I'm saying.
Unfortunately for him, in his own account he was long and bullish. The market do appear toppy as of yesterday. I bought TVIX. Sell in May and go away? It's an often heard phrase year after year.
It's a question that gets ignore. There would need to be something that would indicate fraud. What prompts those to imply that it is guilty? ----- Understandably, one logical answer is whomever is short makes empty, unsubstantiated accusations of fraud.
I strongly agree with you, marr655 Re: "Jane, Jane, Jane a royal pain or just insane.
What part of "not for you" do you not understand?" Let's make one thing absolutely clear. cloudy_day_jane is a constant antagonist. And that poster has earned the board idiot title since it was cloudy_day_jane was bashing in late 2013 before this ran over 11. Today I couldn't help but notice golfnutz58 seeking out jane. LOL !! Why'd anybody would care to get any opinion from that idiot is beyond reason. Ummm, now I need to brace myself for the board idiot telling me I use another screen name.