Agoracom

Hello b-lunist,

if you would prove my statement seriously, I for one believe it must be obvious, what I wanted to say.

Let me repeat my assertion:

A qualified higher sp for the long term isńt guaranteed as a result of an rs, and it would be a confiscation of property, finally, if the sp couldńt be stabilised on the corresponding level.

Why this statement́?

`Cause of my experience of psychological aspects, at the stock markets.

I am fully aware of the hard facts, which are responsible for company value, but this is only one part of the price building game, imo.

Shareprices are built on supply and demand, that́s a platitude.

But what, if "the market" has a "feeling" for the price as a result of the market participants´ memory and the share price history with all it́s foggy surroundings which we´ve had to witness and as a result of this, market participants wouldńt want to pay the corresponding level to the sp before the rs? (Even though a lower price isńt vindicated by the facts)

May I remind you of 2006.

More than 2000% share price increase!

If we would see an rs of 10:1 we have to get an sp of round about 3$ by now. Do you think, that we would see an increase of more than 2000% and would get more than 60$ per share???

I for one dońt believe this, but I know that my factor would be reduced 10:1.

More than 2000% isńt rarely for pennystocks at the otc.bb.

Let us merge as often as we can, let us fulfil the umbrella vision as good and soon as possible and let us hope for the mmp affirmation in the near time, than we will see more than 5 $ as an ptsc share price at the otc.bb, imo.

.........let the story rock and after a while and when facts have spoken by themselfs, let us walk to one of the big exchanges.........

...................and if our sp is going to scrape the sky, I will agree to an rs!

Be well,

Jump