Brilliant Mack, you give me examples that have been failures.
You asked for companies that don't make profits. And I offered two multi-baggers pear, vastly contradictory to your claim that they will decline. Multi-baggers attract interest, awareness, allow long-term investors to reduce their risk into free-carried state. That's what long-term speculative investors want.
"they would have fallen anyway." You have no way of knowing that.
No, the share price would have stayed the same or maybe even strengthened on the string of bad news. Get realistic please. I've seen it, bad news doesn't prevent a penny dreadful stock priced as such from falling further.
Mack, it takes about $1M to float a company. Why would anybody pay $2.1M for a shell instead?
Nobody is paying $2mill, it's the value that a market will realistically assign to a company with no prospects ie the marketcap. There are many pre-requisites to being allowed to list other than the cost. That's why companies back-door list, because they don't meet the requirements and use a shell instead. It is of course also cheaper.
I am telling you that there are people who are actually attracted to it. $0.002 to $0.003 is a 50% return, with very little down side risk!
And I am telling you that most people would not even bother to research a company at .2c/.3c. And those that are attracted to the .2c level - traders based on your description - would look at how illiquid CNN has been over the last 2.5 years and not go near it. That's what recent share price history action has shown us with CNN.
CNN Price at posting:
0.2¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
