Dare to Dream, page-11

OK, let’s assume you aren’t attacking my character etc. and move on from that.

You’ve never seen any “empirical data…”.
em·pir·i·cal

adjective
based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic

Fact: PO3 up strongly on the back of its OTC report. Does that not meet the definition?

Evidence “that a secondary OTC listing as an isolated event can drive share price materially”:

PLL: 7 May, ’18, closes at 15.5c. Begins trading on OTC on 8 May, ’18. By 19/06/18, hits a high of 21c.
I suppose 33% in 1.5 months isn’t material to you.

Re your inability to reconcile any of my data, it was all taken from the ASX website.
Here is a screen cap in case you think I’m making it up:



As for 5 price sensitive announcements – asked and answered.
As for the chart, I posted that in my initial post. Or did I make that up too?
And did I not overtly state the date of 10 March in my first post and NOT October?
Not only do I claim that “the OTC announcement was responsible for significant price appreciation some 14 days later”, I claim that it was responsible for a move in the stock prior to its release as outlined in the My Sinister Theory section.
With all due respect, no doubt you have read what I have written, however I don’t know how well you have understood it.
“The main run up happened between 9 June and 3 November”. Not necessarily.
The move from 45c on 13/01/17 to a high of $1.18 on 10/03/17 was a 262% move versus a 307% during the time frame to which you refer (basis lows to intraday high).
Given that the move I refer to occurred over a 2 month period versus your 5 month period, I don’t consider the percentage difference that significant.
Re my claims being “clear or conclusive”, I never claimed they were”.
I formulated a theory based on facts. The remainder is a case of filling in the pieces.
How one fills those gaps is subjective as the fact is that, especially as it pertains to investing, we are always dealing with incomplete information. Consequently, we must interpret and assume.
That’s why in your opinion my assertions are “absurd” and in my opinion your claims are poorly researched and inaccurate.
We all know what they say about opinions.
Re “That may be true, but I don't think it will be because of your OTC case study…”
Correct. They may have done so by reading my previous posts – which have been eerily accurate from the time that I first started posting on the PO3 (then WRG) forum.
Of course, past performance doesn’t equate to future performance, but I’m not willing to bet against myself. And I don’t claim that PO3 is executing due to my HC posts.
I also don’t “think everyone here is making money BECAUSE OF YOU.”
However, when reading a post from a forum participant who was in tears after making their first ever 10-bagger by following me into PO3, that’s enough satisfaction.
Fact: Nobody on this forum, or probably any other HC forum, has had the potential to make those sorts of returns, let alone actually made them BECAUSE OF YOU.