More math for Pilio-Pilon Here’s some more math for you Pilio:
Scenario assuming Pilio averaged down at .15... or didn't!
SHARES PRICE COST AVG. COST
5000 $10 = $50,000 $10 | initial amount is $50k / $570k = 8.77% of total invested.
5000 $ 8 = $40,000 $9
10000 $ 6 = $60,000 $7.50
20000 $ 4 = $80,000 $5.75 |
40000 $ 2 = $80,000 $3.88* | $310k/$570k = 54.39% of total $ invested when stock is at $2
100000 $ 1 = $100,000 $2.28 | $420k/$570k = 73.68% of $ invested after stock is down 60%
320000 $.50 = $160,000 $1.14**| 480k/500k =96% of shares purchased after stock is down 60% 500000 $570,000
AVG. COST: $1.14
CURRENT STOCK PRICE: 0.14
LOSS at .14: $500,000
The scenario above assumes that Pilio is prolific at averaging down. He invested small at the beginning (less than 9% of what he can easily comfortably afford) and was patient enough to keep the remaining 74% of his firepower to invest at less than half the price he initially purchased at (he waited until the price dropped 60% before he came in with the heavy artillery).
*We all know this is not the case because if he had 80,000 shares which had cost him $310,000 with an avg. cost of $3.88, he would have sold when the stock moved up to $7+ after he had doubled down at $2.
** Of note here, Pilio is buying 64% of all of his shares (and has saved almost 30% of his total money for), this lowest price point.
Pilio needs 700,000 shares to get to 1.2 million. If he does not purchase 700,000 shares, his avg. cost is $1.14 and he loses almost $500,000 when FIU sells at .15. If he purchases the 700,000 shares at .15, he risks a further $105,000 to gain absolutely nothing because he plans to vote YES to a sale at .15, thus locking in his $500,000 loss. He would have us believe that he is doing all this (investing a further $105,000) to get more votes(?) in an attempt to prevent the stock going from .15 to 0, to protect his remaining $70,000??? I think we can reject this as illogical and UNTRUE.
Since the scenario above makes no sense, let’s look at the flipside. WHAT IF Pilio did not buy any shares at .15, and purchased ALL of his 1.2 million shares at above .50? Keeping the same generous weighted ratio’s we have above (where he invests almost 75% of his money when the stock is down beyond 60% and almost 30% at .50 – which is 95% lower than what he initially bought for), he would have 1.2 million shares at an avg. cost of 1.14 and be down 1.2 million dollars (instead of $500,000) with the current stock price of .14. If the stock went to 0.00, he would now be losing $180,000 (instead of $70,000). Here, Pilio would have us believe that he just wants to save his remaining $180,000… to hell with the $1.2 million he will lose if he votes YES.
Now, we all know Pilio isn’t prolific at averaging down and doesn’t have 1.2 million shares at the low avg. cost of 1.14, because if he did, he would have sold 54.39% of his imaginary 1.2 million shares way before he could get to an avg. cost of $1.14 on 1.2 million shares, to make an 80%+ profit (rather than be down $1.2 million right now).
If he was not as prolific at averaging down as I gave him credit for, then his average cost would be substantially higher than 1.14 and he would be losing millions... but still trying to convince us that he is voting YES to the deal because he would rather not lose EVERYTHING (everything meaning the $180,000 he still has left).
What matters here folks are the ratios, the timeline and the FIU chart for the past 4 years. Pilio CANNOT escape these ratios (unless he would have us believe that he bought early 2008 and waited until 2010 before averaging down… all the while watching the stock go from $10 down to $2 in 2009 while he didn’t average down, then watched it go back to $7, and then invested over 80% of his money in 2010 at below $2)
Pilio??? Where art thou???? Please, I would love to see a rebuttal here.
Which one is it?
Did you average down at .15 to vote YES to a sale at .15… so you can lose $500,000 for certain, but save $70k? If you didn’t average down BIG at .15, then your cost per share is very high and you are losing over a million dollars… but you’re voting YES to save your last $180k because you figure your millions are already lost???
Here’s what I suspect really happened.
Pilio works for a company that gets paid to push an agenda on the internet. He probably has different agendas for different clients. In an attempt to appear legit, impress and gain credibility on a message board to which he recently signed up, he claimed he “had 1.2 million shares and was in the stock for 4 years”.
PITY, HE FORGOT TO LOOK AT THE FIU CHART BEFORE OPNENING HIS MOUTH.