General Discussion Topics, page-133081

Post #: 72568153, The share price only just hit above the start of the recent climb, if you offloaded the shares you bought on the way up until yesterday - majority being likely into the liquidity on the DFS news event, it is probable that you would be at least break even.

Again, if you were also doing so in the interest of being able to close out a large short position off-market and avoid the losses on profit that would come from being squeezed on-market, then the whole undertaking would be a net-profit almost certainly.

"No institution pumping the price up to 7c benefits when PLL dump their position at 5.2c for a massive discount", You do if its to close a short position, in that case it's not a dump.

There was ~650m shares traded in those 4 green days from a low of 0.038 to a high of 0.065 the vwap was 0.051. Even if you assume the supposed entity was responsible for 50% of those shares being 325m shares its circa $17m cost.

From the peak of the DFS announcement price of 0.072 to 0.041 on the last trading day yesterday the vwap was 0.052... funny that, you would be able to practically break even buying on the rise and selling on the fall - hell you could maybe even profit slightly if you had algorithms trading for you. There was 940m vol traded during this period so more than enough to facilitate the offloading of 325m shares.

This is all averages so lets even concede that this entity may have taken a $3m loss for potentially propping up the price to close a large short position.

733m new short positions were opened from Jun 16 to Nov 24 (this is excluding any short positions opened prior to this in which you would profit even more), the average price traded for that period was 0.115 so if you were to close even half of those 733m positions at 0.052 (the block trade price) you're looking at a nice profit, let alone if you opened them prior to this period at a higher price.

366.5m x 0.115 = $42m in short interest, closing at 0.052 would give you profits of roughly 50% so $21m - a $3m loss from propping the price up if we're to be generous = $18m. Then add on top the profits saved from being able to close off-market instead of losing profits in a squeeze on-market and it becomes even more enticing.

So even in what I would consider a low-ball case you're looking at somewhere in the ball-park of a $20m profit incentive for "How they benefited".

This may just be an insane hypothetical and ofc just speculation, but its at the very least a plausible and possible scenario where an entity could prop up the price during this period and still profit immensely.