Actually I decided to take another look at this. As you can see...

Actually I decided to take another look at this. As you can see I have been modelling WBT for a few years, so I went back to my daily chart which I hadn't checked for a couple of months, and it has some interesting observations.



It seems I had this as being about to start wave 5 of the supercycle, but wave 4 fell to the 78% fib of wave 3, which is not where you expect wave 4 to go, so I left it for a while and moved on, but now I notice that on the daily basis the current price is about 78% of subwave 1 of wave 5, with a potential back test at the bottom. If that is right then the pattern since Oct last becomes a wave 1 and 2 (as I sugested earlier) but that also predicts that this price should be about the bottom of wave 2 and wave 3 should be beginning now with a predicted price of around of around 614. It is a longish cycle with the target hitting around July/August. Wave 5 should be higher still, circa 600 to around 8, but that is a distance away on this cycle. I don't know whether the business model supports those prices, but that is a valid reading of the longer term chart I think.

For this to hold it can not fall much, if anything from the current price or it breaches the 78% fib and voids the pattern. If a CR is required in that time there will be some dilution, which may or may not be material to the model depending on how big it is. 3-5% dilution wont be noticed I think, but these models tend to assume a steady state for the number of shares on issue. The right time to do a raise would be at the circa 600 mark as that would time it to subwave 4 and an expected 38% drop anyway. Note that the end of the supercycle wave 5 should see a significant pull back (about a year or year and a half away) so subwave 5 and wave 5 would end together and could see a significant retrace, but that is a long, long way away.

There is also an argument to be mounted that a 78% retrace in wave 4 causes a reset of the wave count (as it should not be more than 50%), but I don't have evidence to support that theory. It doesn't change the subwave 3 target in this discussion, but would impact the subwave 5 target, which we are not estimating other than as a range in any case.