Martin Tsvetkov

Onteco Corp. (PINK:ONTC) Sinks Further Following Reverse Split

by Martin Tsvetkov February 15, 2012
5ONTC_chart.pngNews about a successful completion of a lighting project was supposed to boost the shares of Onteco Corp. (PINK:ONTC). Contrary to expectations, it failed to do so, which would probably not have happened if it had not come hard on the heels of a giant reverse stock split. As a result, what you now get is another pump-and-dump effort.

The market value of ONTC shares depreciated by $0.035, or 25%, to $0.105 per share, their fourth fall out of the last five sessions and the lowest close following the 1-for-1000 reverse stock split effectuated on Jan. 11, 2012. The latter immediately moved ONTC from the unattractive 0001 stock marketplace to the much more prestigious pink sheets quotes. Too bad that the upgrade is way too artificial to last long.

2ONTC_logo.gifWhile ONTC's most recent press release sounds quite promising, the timing is all but perfect. Back in November, the company's BoD approved a 1-for-1000 reverse stock split of its issued and outstanding stock in order to attract institutional investors. At least, this is how they supported their point of view. In reality, the real motive behind such an act is the fact that ONTC had reached the rock-bottom of the OTC market, i.e the 0001 stock marketplace. Why ONTC had sunk so deep in value is a good question in this respect.

Since the company's latest press release about the successful completion of the delivery and installation of its first ever lighting project did nothing to stop ONTC stock's free fall, it is little wondering that third parties have now embarked on a paid promotion worth $10 thousand to push ONTC up as high as it gets in the forthcoming session.

Onteco Corp. concluded the third calendar quarter of 2011 with:

  • cash reserves in excess of $84K, up 35% from Q4 2010;
  • working capital deficit of $1.34M vs. $0.47M incurred in Q4 2010;
  • quarterly revenue of $203K;
  • net quarterly loss of $147K as opposed to a loss of $70K in Q3 2010.

Comments 0

Type the characters that you see in the box (5 characters).