RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Not the time to be selling here :) $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$I'm not sure if you're aware of this but from memory there's regulations that foce any entity owning more than 10% of a stock to discose the information with formal fillings. No company could stealth own one third of a stock without us knowing.
Righttothetop wrote: You're right of course.....but the recent bought deal put essentially 1/5-1/4 of shares outstanding out there.....so if someone really wanted to, they could gobble up many of those at the 0.58c or so....
The trading in the new year has many million shares traded, if I cared I'd look how many actually but I don't that much...maybe someone wants to get that tally.....
So with so much turnover at or around current levels, any aggressor could slowly, but surely, start making their way to 1/3 or more of ownership....
Afterwhich, getting to 50+1 is a whole lot easier and cheaper.....
An outfit like Bains say, knows how to play the game....and they're just an example.
So whoever looks to take LABs out may not get the majority stake for 0.50 even....they'll get it for a heck of alot cheaper than a buck......which would be a travesty....:)
WillyWally wrote: Exactly, people saying some company could buy all the shares under 50 cents clearly have no clue how the stock market works. Maybe they'd manage to get a few millions under 50 cents but then available shares would start drying up. Same mecanism as a short squeeze, as you're saying.
Lemoyne wrote: By the time anyone tries to buy 130M shares, this thing will be going sky high. For every M shares bought, theres 1 less M on the market. Combine it with insider SEDI filings and you can be sure low volume and remaining owners knowing someone tries to buy up 50%+ short squeeze will make the last people standing take in a decent profit. The fact anyone tries to buy up 50% of a company in itself will pump up the price, regardless of performance.