Shorter, but pretty damn important #GNS update. The #SEC officially approved #NYSE American’s new $0.25 minimum trading-price rule today, BUT the effective date was PUSHED BACK from the originally proposed October 1, 2026 all the way out to July 1, 2027. For GNS, that changes the near term #chessboard considerably. The reverse split scenario that was starting to stare shareholders directly in the face this fall is no longer being driven by this specific October deadline. Instead, the amended effective date gives #GNS roughly nine additional months of runway, and the more you look at what is already moving inside the company, the more important that extra time becomes. This is not simply nine more months to hope something improves. A lot of the #flywheel is already spinning. - #Financials: GNS’s three operating businesses reached operational #profitability in Q4 2025, followed by $2.7 million in net profit from operations in Q1 2026 and $4.3 million in Q2. The August balance sheet update then showed $7.0 million in H1 net profit from operations on 156% year-over-year revenue growth, while net assets increased 57% to $106.6 million, liabilities fell 37% to $25.4 million, and the company reported that all third party debt had been repaid. Those latest H1 and balance sheet figures are unaudited management numbers currently undergoing review, but the broader operating direction is no longer a one quarter story. The trend is already there. The new question now is how far GNS can carry it. - #ASX: This one is further along than simply saying the dual-listing process is moving forward. GNS received initial feedback from ASX on its In-Principle Advice Application, is preparing its response with DLA Piper, remains in active dialogue with the exchange, and has stated that it estimates completing the process and listing on ASX in Q4 2026, subject to ASX review and approval. That target now sits months ahead of the July 1, 2027 $0.25 rule effective date. - #Jewel Bank / #JUSD: GNS owns a 9.9% stake in Jewel Financial and committed $5 million toward getting Jewel’s operations moving. Jewel already holds both a Bermuda banking license and a Class F digital-asset-business license, while JUSD is targeted for H2 2026. That matters because Jewel is not starting from scratch waiting for a regulatory framework to appear. The GENIUS Act is already law, and the additional runway gives that framework time to move deeper into implementation while JUSD and Jewel’s banking operations develop. - #CLARITY Act: This also gives the digital-asset market structure fight considerably more room to breathe. CLARITY is not law yet, and there are still political and procedural hurdles in front of it, but the July 2027 date gives that process time to continue through the 2026 midterms and, if necessary, into the next Congress. When you combine that with the #GENIUS Act already moving toward implementation, the regulatory environment Jewel is being built into could look materially different before this new #NYSE American hard floor ever becomes operative. - #Court cases: Litigation takes time, especially when motions, discovery fights, service issues, appeals and procedural arguments keep extending the calendar. Some GNS related matters could resolve sooner through rulings or settlements, especially if pressure continues building, but the larger cases can take years if the procedural fight continues. We have already watched that longevity play out with #Moe and #Ritz. Whether somebody thinks they should still be dragging nubs behind them at this point is almost beside the point...the courts move on court time. Nine more months gives those cases more room to progress/settle naturally before this specific exchange deadline becomes a capital structure issue again. - #AI and Genius City: This is another area I do not think should be treated like a future idea waiting to begin. GNS has already launched its full Genius OS AI-powered product suite, Student AI and Teacher AI had already scaled to hundreds of thousands of users, and management is positioning the platform as a higher-margin revenue driver. The company also opened the first phase of its $14 million Genius City project in Bali, tying physical locations into the broader AI education ecosystem. On top of that, GNS has begun building an AI treasury with exposure to private AI and technology companies. You can debate valuations, timing and which AI companies ultimately win, but the broader direction of capital and technology is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore. The cat is out of the bag, and it is not going back in. None of those pieces need July 2027 to magically save them. They are already moving. What the additional runway does is give them more time to compound, mature and begin producing evidence before an October reverse split narrative can interrupt the story. And this last part is my #opinion, not something I can prove. I believe the looming reverse split narrative itself had become another tool helping reinforce what I believe to be manipulated downward price pressure on GNS. When traders believe a company is running directly toward a forced RS, that expectation becomes part of the trade whether the split has actually happened or not. It becomes something shorts can lean on, something longs become nervous about, and something the market begins pricing before the event ever occurs. Removing that immediate October clock takes one of those narratives off the board. That does not mean every listing risk disappeared, and it certainly does not guarantee the stock suddenly runs. NYSE American still retains other listing and discretionary enforcement authority, GNS still has to execute, ASX still requires approval, Jewel still has to launch successfully, legislation still has to make it through Congress, and litigation can always take longer than shareholders want. But the specific reverse split scenario that was staring GNS shareholders in the face because of the proposed October 1st hard floor is no longer being driven by that deadline. When I put everything together...the operating profitability already established across Q4, Q1 and Q2, the stronger balance sheet, Q4 ASX target, Jewel and JUSD, GENIUS Act implementation, potential CLARITY progress, continuing court cases, Genius City, Genius OS and the broader AI strategy...I do not see a company sitting still hoping time saves it. I see a flywheel that is already spinning, and today it was given more runway to build momentum before that specific $0.25 hammer can come down. For GNS, I see this as a CLEAR positive. SEC filing: sec.gov/files/rules/sro/nyse… (Currently finishing up the share audit for everyone) OneLove and StayBlessed NumberOverNarrative DiggerBG NFA/DYODD #DiggerBG #GNS #NumbersOverNarrative @rogerhamilton

It’s been a slow morning, I’m running behind, and somehow it's already Wednesday....with that being said, my H1 report (Part 2) will be dropping sometime today/tonight (it's too long for a normal post, so it has to be done in X Article form, which does take a little longer to format properly). Before I get back to that, though, I wanted to take a second to show some gratitude to the people who follow me and invest their time in reading my work. You don’t have to, but you choose to, and I’m grateful for that. I know some of my pieces can seem long and drawn out, but that is deliberate. Thoroughness matters, and so does making sure the people who are still getting up to speed are not left behind. We are all ignorant of certain things, and admitting that is usually where learning starts. I am still learning and growing with y’all too, and your questions, input, different perspectives, and interactions keep my brain churning and my shovel dirty. In a world slowly devolving into caveman speak, quick dopamine hits, and writings tailored to shorter and shorter attention spans, it means something to know there are still people here who genuinely enjoy thought-provoking work, and are willing to sit with said work. That is probably one of the things I appreciate most about our little corner of X. The people here do not need everything reduced to a slogan, a meme, or a five second explanation before deciding whether something is worth thinking about. I only have 316 followers...and I say “only” to put the size of the account into perspective, not because I’m unappreciative of the people already here. I will take high quality followers over empty quantity followers every single time. When I first hopped on X, which I avoided for years because I felt like the platform often rewarded the worst parts of society at nearly any cost, I wanted this page to become a critical-thinking safe haven. I wanted a place where people could question things, challenge narratives, look at the evidence, and leave knowing a little more than they did when they showed up, instead of building just another dopamine grifter page designed around whatever gets the quickest reactions. That atmosphere exists now because of the people who chose to participate in it. You guys. The fact that real critical thinking takes place here also has a funny side effect: it tends to keep a lot of the trolls and negative narrative driven bullshit away. People here are willing to question things, look under the hood, and think for themselves, which makes it a lot harder for bad arguments to survive simply because they are loud, popular, or repeated enough times. Knowledge has always been kryptonite to people who depend on others not asking the next question. Growth and reach are still the goal because I want to arm more and more retail with knowledge, but growing the right way matters just as much as growing at all. I do not want to trade what this little corner of X has become just to make the number next to my name bigger. Over the past three months (and a week) this account has generated roughly 2.74 million impressions despite having only 316 followers, and that contrast says far more to me than the follower count ever could. That reach is not just my number. It represents every one of you sharing, reposting, quoting, discussing, challenging, and helping the work travel far beyond the size of the account itself. A page this small does not reach that many eyes without people deciding the work is worth passing along, and I do not take that lightly. The more retail we wake up, the better our odds are in battle, but just as importantly, I want the people already here to know that I see the support and appreciate the time you continue to give me. Retail will eventually have its cake and eat it too, but until then, we keep learning, keep digging, and keep making it harder for narratives to survive where the numbers tell a different story. From the bottom of my heart, thank you all for being part of what this page has become, and is becoming. Hold your head high and finish the week strong. Pain and hardship are simply weakness leaving the body. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG #NumbersOverNarratives #RetailInvestors #RetailEducation #CriticalThinking #DueDiligence #MarketResearch #FinancialLiteracy #InvestorEducation #IndependentResearch #QuestionEverything #KnowledgeIsPower #Retail #Thankful #DiggerBG

Roger, this October 6th announcement says GNS purchased 10 Bitcoin for approximately $854,000. It describes potential funding sources without identifying which funded this purchase. Was it operating cash, ATM proceeds or another source? If shares were issued to fund it, disclose the quantity, net proceeds and effect on existing shareholders’ ownership. At an illustrative share price of $0.16, that money equates to approximately 5.34 million shares before fees and market impact. Actual buyback execution would depend on prices and liquidity, but shareholders deserve to understand the choice. How much shareholder authorized buyback capacity remains (exact number), and why did the board consider Bitcoin a better use of this money than repurchasing shares, preserving liquidity or investing in the operating business? That question leads straight back to the reconciliation shareholders have requested for months. We cannot properly evaluate a capital decision per share while the share count remains unresolved. Publish the January 1st opening balance, every issuance and PFW exercise, repurchases, completed cancellations and the closing balance through October 6th. Calculate public float separately and explain the denominator used for NAV per share. The public data illustrates the problem. ChartExchange lists float at 74,279,790 for December 31st, 2025, and 172,868,119 for September 15th, 2026; Finviz currently displays approximately 172.87 million. That is a reported increase of roughly 132.7%, not proof that actual tradeable supply increased by that amount. ChartExchange’s float jumps between July 15th and July 31st while its displayed shares outstanding remain unchanged. The provider needs to explain its data change. Management needs to supply the dated company figures against which shareholders can check it. Your H1 disclosure separately reports 9,905,782 ordinary shares issued through the ATM after June 30th for $1.65 million. What was the NET change in legal shares outstanding over the year to date? Show whether repurchases delivered a net reduction or were offset by issuance, and distinguish completed cancellations from announced or pending retirements. Connect that share reconciliation to the Bitcoin purchase. Explain the assumptions, timeframe and financing costs supporting its expected benefit per ordinary share. Growing the treasury can create value, but any issuance used to fund it belongs in the calculation shareholders receive. I believe in the company’s products, respect shareholders who have held for YEARS through losses, and support pursuing the court cases. My concern now is management’s execution and capital allocation. Your willingness to fight is clear. However, you and the board also need to demonstrate how these decisions strengthen existing shareholders’ ownership and value per share. I’m starting to feel played with, and honestly, this shit is growing old. I have held back publication of my roughly 635 page pre-H1 reconciliation investigation while waiting for the company to address the discrepancies and numerous apparent errors I documented in its SEC filings. I still cannot, to this day, reproduce a complete share count reconciliation from the companies disclosed figures. “Prudent use” of the ATM offers little reassurance while that remains unresolved. The company has the records needed to explain where this money came from, how the share count changed, and why this decision serves existing shareholders. Stop beating around the bush, and publish an answer we can verify. My H1 breakdown will be released this evening. It is the middle section of a three part investigation...examine the pre-H1 record, break down what the company reported in H1, then connect the two and test whether the numbers reconcile. Tonight’s piece focuses on what H1 says about the company’s current position...the improvements, the weaknesses, and the questions that remain. The full reconciliation comes afterward. Each stage needs to stand on its own before I draw conclusions across the complete record. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG #GNS #GeniusGroup #DiggerBG #NumbersOverNarratives #H1Results #FinancialTransparency #ShareholderRights #ShareCount #CapitalAllocation #Retail

#QNTM Earned a Shovel There are stocks I find because I am looking for stocks, and then there are companies that get onto my radar because something about them reaches well beyond the ticker. Quantum BioPharma - NASDAQ: QNTM - is the second kind for me. My mom has Multiple Sclerosis. I have watched what this disease can quietly take from someone over time... Energy, mobility, confidence in what your own body is going to let you do tomorrow, and pieces of independence most healthy people never have to think about all become daily question marks. MS was real to me long before Lucid-MS showed up in an investor presentation, which also makes me more cautious about this story, not less. When the disease is sitting inside your own family, you do not need another company promising a miracle. You want to know what the biology actually says. That part happens to fit me pretty well. My degree is in science, and while I spend most of my public time buried in float calculations, filings, market structure and whatever other hole I have decided to climb into, I genuinely enjoy getting underneath the mechanism of something. With QNTM, that became a much deeper rabbit hole than simply asking whether a microcap biotechnology company had a promising drug. The market story was familiar enough too. QNTM is a microcap involved in litigation alleging manipulation of its stock, led by management willing to fight that battle publicly, and already sitting near a corner of the market I spend a ridiculous amount of time studying. I also want to make something CLEAR before we go any further...This is not me walking away from #GNS. That shovel is still very much in use, I am simply making room for another shovel in the closet. The Part That Really Got Me - The Biology Lucid-MS, or Lucid-21-302, is interesting to me because Quantum is not simply trying to build another drug around suppressing immune activity. To understand why that caught my attention, you have to go one level deeper into the biology of MS. Myelin is the lipid rich insulating structure wrapped around axons in the central nervous system. If you think about an electrical wire, the axon is doing the signaling and myelin is part of what allows that signal to travel efficiently. In the CNS, myelin is produced by oligodendrocytes, and one of the proteins critical to its structure is myelin basic protein, or MBP. MBP does more than occupy space inside the sheath. It helps bring the inner surfaces of the multilayered myelin membrane together. The chemistry matters because MBP normally contains positively charged arginine residues that help it interact with negatively charged membrane lipids, contributing to the compact structure of myelin. That is where citrullination enters the picture. Citrullination is a post-translational modification in which PAD enzymes convert arginine residues inside proteins into citrulline. That changes the chemistry of the protein, including removing the positive charge associated with arginine. Citrullination itself is not inherently pathological; normal biology is full of post-translational modifications. What becomes interesting in MS is abnormal or excessive citrullination, particularly involving MBP. If enough of those charged arginine residues are altered, MBP can interact differently with the membrane it is helping stabilize. Increased MBP citrullination has been associated with altered myelin structure, greater susceptibility to degradation, and MS pathology. PAD2 has received particular attention, while PAD4 has also been identified in myelin and can contribute to MBP deimination. There is another layer that makes the mechanism more interesting than simply saying “myelin breaks down.” Citrullinated MBP may not only become structurally different...the modification can change how portions of the protein are recognized and presented to the immune system. That creates a possible bridge between a structural problem inside myelin and part of the autoimmune biology occurring around it. So when I see Lucid-MS reduced to “a drug that regrows myelin,” I think that skips several important steps. The more useful scientific question is whether interfering with this pathological PAD associated process can preserve the biochemical and structural integrity of myelin enough to change what happens downstream. Quantum reports that Lucid-MS has produced prevention and reversal of measures of myelin degradation in preclinical models. That is interesting, BUT it is still preclinical evidence rather than human efficacy. The intellectual property side matters also, because good biology means a lot less economically if the company cannot protect or control what eventually works. Quantum relies on an exclusive license from University Health Network covering Lucid-MS and related patents, including the current U.S. Lucid-21-302 patent, which the company reports remains effective through 2036. That gives Quantum an exclusive development and commercialization position around the core compound, although the license also carries obligations to UHN and has to remain in good standing. There are also several biological outcomes that can get blended together very quickly in a biotech story, and I do not think they should be. #Myelin preservation means preventing or reducing additional damage. #Remyelination means rebuilding myelin around axons that have already lost it. #Neuroprotection means protecting neurons and axons from additional injury. Functional recovery means producing an improvement that actually matters to the patient. Those outcomes are related, but they are not interchangeable. A molecule can influence a biological marker without meaningfully changing disability. It can produce an MRI signal without producing the clinical improvement patients care about. It can preserve myelin better than placebo without rebuilding what has already been lost. That is why I am going to care much more about trial design, endpoints and eventual Phase 2 data than I will about whatever adjective gets placed in the next press release. Progressive #MS makes that distinction even more important. Reducing inflammatory relapses and stopping the slow accumulation of neurological disability are not necessarily the same problem. A therapy attempting to intervene closer to myelin damage and neurodegeneration is attacking the disease from a different direction than traditional immunomodulation. Different does not automatically mean better, but different enough, with a biologically plausible mechanism, is worth watching. Why I Waited for Phase 2 I have been accumulating QNTM and digging into the company for a while. I deliberately waited before writing about it because I wanted Lucid-MS to clear another gate, and that path was not perfectly clean. Quantum submitted its IND in April 2026. In May, the FDA placed the program on clinical hold and the company withdrew its earlier Phase 2 timing guidance. That matters because biotech timelines rarely move in a straight line, and I would rather include the ugly part of the process than pretend August arrived in a vacuum. On August 10th, 2026, the FDA cleared the IND and allowed Quantum to proceed toward a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled Phase 2 trial in progressive MS. As of the latest material I have reviewed, I still have not seen confirmation that progressive MS patients have actually begun dosing. The company has described trial start-up and site selection activity, and an intention to begin enrollment and drug administration as quickly as possible. The wording matters because FDA clearance to conduct a trial is not FDA validation that the drug works. Phase 1 gave Quantum human safety and tolerability information in healthy participants sufficient to support further development. Phase 2 is where the company begins putting the actual biological thesis in front of the population that matters. This is also where my science brain probably becomes more skeptical than my investor brain. I want to know who gets enrolled, how progressive disease is defined, how long patients are followed, which imaging measures are selected, what disability endpoints are used, whether the study is powered appropriately and how missing data are handled. More importantly, I want the results to form a COHERENT chain...The intended biology should move, that movement should show up in a credible imaging or tissue level signal, and that signal should eventually connect to something meaningful for the patient. That standard matters because statistical significance and clinical significance are not synonyms, and neither are biomarker movement and restored function. Until those data exist, the correct word is potential. The Other Half of the QNTM Story The science might be why I stayed, but the rest of this company certainly did not make the rabbit hole any shallower. Quantum has filed litigation in the Southern District of New York alleging that CIBC World Markets, RBC Dominion Securities and others participated in #spoofing and #manipulation of QNTM shares between January 2020 and August 2024. The company is seeking more than $700 million in damages. Those remain allegations rather than judicial findings. On March 30th, 2026, the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part. The Exchange Act claims survived, while the common law fraud claim was dismissed without prejudice. I prefer that description to saying either side “won,” because it tells us what actually remained alive. There is another layer to the lawsuit that matters, particularly for shareholders who were already around in 2025. Quantum distributed litigation linked Contingent Value Rights, or CVRs, on a one-for-one basis to eligible Class B shareholders of record on October 27th, 2025. Each CVR gives its holder a pro rata interest in a pool equal to at least 10% and as much as 50% of qualifying net proceeds ultimately recovered by Quantum from the litigation, if there are any. The rights are non-transferable and non-assignable, so somebody buying QNTM common today does not simply acquire those same CVRs with the shares. That creates an important economic difference between certain legacy shareholders and somebody entering the stock now. That case has continued to move. On September 30th, 2026, the related actions were consolidated into a single procedural track for future filings. That does not tell us how the case ends, but it does tell us the litigation is advancing rather than sitting dormant. Quantum also voluntarily delisted its Class B shares from the Canadian Securities Exchange in September while maintaining its #NASDAQ listing. Management said it expected the move to consolidate trading into Nasdaq as the company's principal marketplace. I am treating that as management's stated expectation rather than assuming the trading data has already proven it. The company has also begun attracting some outside sell side attention. On September 17th, Rodman & Renshaw initiated coverage with a Buy rating and an $8 price target, and Quantum disclosed that the research was unpaid and that it provided no consideration for the report. I am not outsourcing my valuation to somebody else's price target, and an analyst rating is certainly not evidence that the thesis works. What matters to me is simply that another outside research shop has decided the company is worth covering. That naturally pushed me deeper into the execution data. If this is your first time reading my work, this is probably the easiest way to explain what happens when I get interested in a ticker....I do not start by deciding something looks wrong, I start by figuring out what normal actually looks like. What 189 Trading Sessions This Year Actually Say I pulled QNTM's exchange distribution from January 2nd through October 2nd, 2026, giving me 189 trading sessions. The first thing I wanted was simply a baseline. Across that period... - Average Off-Exchange volume was 52.36%, with a median of 52.51%. - 115 of 189 sessions...60.85%...traded at least half of the daily reported volume Off-Exchange. - 31 sessions...16.40%...crossed 60% Off-Exchange. - 15 sessions...7.94%...crossed 65%. - 6 sessions...3.17%...crossed 70%. The observed range ran from 29.67% to 77.21%. Those numbers are interesting, but they are not self explanatory. “Off-Exchange” is broader than “dark pool,” and large amounts of U.S. equity volume routinely executes away from displayed exchanges through ATSs, wholesalers, internalization and other channels. A high percentage alone is therefore not evidence of manipulation simply because it looks dramatic on a screenshot. If I am going to call something unusual, the number first has to earn the adjective. The middle 50% of QNTM's observations runs from roughly 46.76% to 57.68% Off-Exchange, producing an interquartile range of 10.92 percentage points. Using the standard 1.5×IQR method on this dataset gives an upper fence of 74.06% and a lower fence of 30.38%. Two sessions fall outside those boundaries: January 9th at 77.21% Off-Exchange and February 4th at 29.67%. January 9th also sits roughly 2.9 standard deviations above the observed mean. That does not tell me why either day happened. What it does is give me two dates that are objectively unusual relative to QNTM's own trading year, and that is far more useful than pointing at a screenshot and deciding something feels wrong. The distribution also changes materially over time. June averaged 56.85% Off-Exchange, while August averaged 48.27%, a difference of almost 8.6 percentage points. June produced seven sessions above 60%, while August produced none. September moved back to 53.90%. I do not need to attach a motive to that movement to find it interesting. The useful question is what changed around those periods and whether other layers of the market data moved with them. The individual venue mix gives me another way to test that. January 9th, the year's high Off-Exchange session, printed 77.21% Off-Exchange against 8.44% on Nasdaq GSM. February 4th, the year's low, printed 29.67% Off-Exchange against 34.95% on Nasdaq GSM. September 22nd came in at 36.27% Off-Exchange and 38.08% on Nasdaq GSM. That inverse movement is not automatically sinister because venue percentages are compositional. More flow in one bucket necessarily leaves less for another. The question worth investigating is whether the dates showing the largest shifts also line up with changes in price, total volume, short volume, borrow availability, FTDs, spreads, volatility, financings, company news or litigation milestones. That is where descriptive statistics become useful. They do not prove the theory. They tell me where the theory deserves to be tested. #EDGX gave me another reason to keep going, but that probably needs a little context. EDGX is one of Cboe’s four fully electronic U.S. equities exchanges, alongside BZX, BYX and EDGA. It is a registered exchange, not an Off-Exchange dark pool, and it operates within the broader National Market System with its own order routing and liquidity incentives. Cboe reported EDGX at roughly 4.5% of total U.S. equity market volume in April 2026, which gives some perspective for why individual QNTM sessions where EDGX absorbed roughly one-fifth or more of the stock’s reported venue volume caught my attention. I am not taking that national market share number and mechanically declaring a QNTM session abnormal. A single stock can distribute very differently across venues than the market as a whole. The broader figure is useful because it tells me the concentration is worth measuring, not because it proves what that concentration means. On QNTM, EDGX reached approximately 23.60% on March 5th, 22.88% on September 4th, 21.13% on July 29th, and sat near the 19%-20% range on several other sessions. What interests me is the repeated concentration. When one exchange is capturing around one-fifth of a microcap’s reported daily venue volume on multiple dates, I want to know whether that is ordinary routing behavior for QNTM, whether it clusters around particular market conditions, and/or whether it persists across time. That is why EDGX belongs on the board. The next step is to calculate QNTM’s own mean, median, standard deviation, interquartile range, z-score and persistence for EDGX and every other meaningful venue across the same 189 sessions. Once that baseline exists, I can determine whether those 20%+ EDGX days are actually unusual for QNTM, rather than simply unusual looking relative to the broader market. That is a much better starting point than a cherry picked narrative. Other Paths to Value - AND the Cost of Getting There Lucid-MS is the asset that pulled me into the science, but QNTM is not operating with only one possible path to value. The most obvious secondary lane is the litigation. The Exchange Act claims survived the March dismissal decision, and the September consolidation moved the related proceedings into a more developed procedural posture. None of that guarantees a recovery, but it is a catalyst path that exists independently of the clinical program. There is also Unbuzzd. Quantum retains roughly 19.5% ownership in the business and has disclosed a royalty structure entitling it to 7% of sales until cumulative royalty payments reach $250 million, followed by 3% in perpetuity. Quantum also retains the pharmaceutical and medical development rights associated with those formulations. I am not assigning some heroic number to that today. A royalty agreement only becomes valuable if there are meaningful sales behind it, and an equity interest only matters if the underlying company creates value...BUT Unbuzzd has been moving toward a broader U.S. rollout, new leadership has been brought in to pursue financing and expansion, and a possible future public listing creates another route through which Quantum COULD eventually realize value that does not depend entirely on Lucid-MS. Qlarity is smaller, but it belongs on the map as well. It has already received a Canadian product license, which gives Quantum another commercializable asset outside the MS program. I would not build a valuation around it, but I also would not pretend it does not exist either. The cost of pursuing all of those opportunities is where the capital structure comes back into the story. Quantum reported roughly 3.89 million Class B shares outstanding at the end of 2025 and approximately 7.58 million by June 30th, 2026, an increase of about 94.9% in six months. The filing lets us account for essentially all of that growth through the ATM program, convertible debenture conversions, shares issued for debt, warrant exercises, and RSU issuance. Known subsequent issuances disclosed after June 30th take the identifiable share count to at least roughly 8.09 million Class B shares. That is real dilution, and I am not going to hide it simply because I personally like the science or the optionality. The structure also still carries additional potential dilution above the current share count through warrants, options and convertible debentures, which means the capital story is not entirely historical. At the same time, the operating picture is not static either. Cash burn improved materially year over year, and management reported roughly $9.5 million in combined cash, cash equivalents and digital assets at June 30th, with stated runway extending to at least October 2027 at the then current burn rate. A meaningful portion of that liquidity was held in digital assets rather than traditional cash, so I view the quality of that runway differently than I would if the entire amount were sitting in cash. That leaves me with a more useful capital question than simply asking whether dilution occurred. It obviously did. What I want to know is whether the shares issued are buying enough runway, clinical progress, regulatory de-risking and development of the company's other assets to create more eventual value than shareholders are giving up along the way. That answer is not available yet, but at least now the question is actually framed correctly. Where This Can Still Go Wrong (Both Sides Have to be Weighed) None of those additional paths change the fact that this is still a microcap biotech, which means there are about seventeen different ways the story can punch an investor in the face before breakfast. Lucid-MS can fail Phase 2. The mechanism can be scientifically elegant and clinically irrelevant. Enrollment can drag. An imaging endpoint can look interesting while functional outcomes disappoint. Safety can look different in a progressive MS population receiving longer treatment than it did in healthy Phase 1 volunteers, and later trials can fail even if Phase 2 works. The IP position is valuable only for as long as the company maintains the rights necessary to use it, just as analyst coverage means nothing if the underlying assumptions eventually prove wrong. Unbuzzd can fail to scale, a public listing may never happen, and royalty economics do not mean much without real sales. The litigation can advance for years and still produce far less than shareholders expect, while the CVRs themselves pay nothing unless qualifying net proceeds are actually recovered. Digital assets can lose value, future financing can create additional dilution, and Qlarity can remain commercially insignificant despite holding a product license. The evidentiary standard has to remain the same across all of it. An unusual trading day does not establish wrongdoing, a complaint does not establish liability, an interesting biological mechanism does not establish an approved therapy, and an additional asset does not deserve a large valuation simply because it exists. Those are not disclaimers bolted onto the thesis...they are part of the actual reason the thesis is worth investigating. Why QNTM Earned a Shovel I have spent enough time around microcaps to know how easy it is to fall in love with optionality. Put a tiny valuation underneath a potentially enormous drug opportunity, mix in litigation, unusual trading and a few additional assets, and almost any spreadsheet can be made to tell you whatever you wanted to believe before you even opened it. That is not what interests me here. What interests me is whether the core pieces survive scrutiny when they are forced to interact. The biology has to survive contact with patients. The clinical program has to produce something meaningful. The capital structure has to justify what shareholders are giving up to finance it. The legal and market structure questions have to survive the evidence rather than the narrative built around them. There is also one part of this story where I will never be completely detached, and that is my Mother. If Lucid-MS eventually becomes something that can meaningfully protect myelin, slow disability, restore function, or help somebody else's mom keep pieces of her life that this disease would otherwise take...then every second digging here was well worth it. I will care about that outcome whether I own a single share or not...Wanting, and hoping for that result, does not change the standard though. Whatever conclusion I eventually reach has to survive all of those layers together. Lying to myself, MS patients, or other retail investors helps no one. That is the exact same standard I have tried to uphold with GNS, and again, QNTM is not replacing that work/time slot. The GNS shovel is still dirty and that dig is still very much alive. QNTM has simply shown me enough to deserve a shovel of its own. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG NFA/DYODD #QNTM #QuantumBioPharma #LucidMS #MultipleSclerosis #Biotech #Microcap #MarketStructure #DarkPools #EDGX #NumbersOverNarratives #DiggerBG #DueDiligence @rogerhamilton @zsaeed

#GNS - Five Days = 53.9% of YEARLY volume From January 2nd through the time the numbers were pulled on October 2nd, 2026, GNS recorded approximately 1.159 billion shares of reported trading volume across 189 trading sessions. The total is large, but the distribution is what caught my attention. More than half of that volume came from only five trading days. Those five sessions were May 27th, May 28th, September 30th, October 1st, and October 2nd. Together, they accounted for approximately 624 million shares, or 53.9% of all reported GNS volume during the period. The Five Highest-Volume Days... - May 27th, 2026 82,449,463 shares - May 28th, 2026 291,498,254 shares - September 30th, 2026 58,937,916 shares - October 1st, 2026 163,469,978 shares - October 2nd, 2026* 27,690,292 shares Combined: 624,045,903 shares...53.9% of all reported volume through the time the October 2nd numbers were pulled. *October 2nd reflects the volume recorded when the numbers were pulled that day. Those five sessions represent only about 2.6% of the 189 trading days, yet they generated more volume than the other 184 sessions combined. The five highlighted days averaged approximately 124.8 million shares per session, while the other 184 sessions averaged only about 2.91 million shares per day. On an average session basis, the five highest volume days traded at roughly 43 times the volume of everything outside that group. That already tells us the year was heavily concentrated, but the calendar makes the concentration more interesting. The five sessions were not spread randomly across January through October. Every one of them fell inside one of two narrow trading windows: May 27th–28th and September 30th–October 2nd. The first window was May 27th and May 28th. Those two sessions produced approximately 373.95 million shares of volume, equal to about 32.3% of all reported GNS trading volume during the entire period. May 27th traded more than 82 million shares while GNS finished the day near $0.22. On May 28th, reported volume jumped to nearly 291.5 million shares, while the price pushed as high as roughly $0.36 before closing around $0.27. May 28th becomes even harder to dismiss once it is compared with the rest of the year. That single session traded approximately 100 times the average volume of the other 184 trading days. It also produced about 2.64 times as much volume as GNS recorded during January, February, March, and April COMBINED. The first four months of 2026 produced approximately 110.5 million shares of total volume. May 27th and May 28th together produced approximately 373.95 million shares, or about 3.38 times the entire January through April total. Two trading sessions therefore generated more than three times the volume accumulated during the first four months of the year. The price action adds another layer to that first window. GNS did not simply trade enormous volume around the same price. The stock expanded sharply intraday, reached roughly $0.36, and then surrendered a meaningful portion of that move before the May 28th close. Looking only at the closing price would miss a large part of what happened inside the session. The second window, spanning September 30th through October 2nd (current window), shows a similar concentration with a different price path. Approximately 250.1 million shares traded across those three sessions through the time the October 2nd numbers were pulled. That represented another 21.6% of all reported volume during the period and approximately 2.26 times the entire January through April volume total. GNS entered that window around $0.146. During the trading episode, the price moved as high as $0.2510 before falling back toward $0.15. From the pre window level to $0.2510, that was roughly a 72% upward move, followed by a substantial retracement while a quarter billion shares were trading through the same narrow period. The important point is not that the price stayed flat, because it did not. The price moved violently. What stands out is that the move largely disappeared despite the extraordinary amount of turnover that accompanied it. The five sessions also look very different from the rest of the year when each is compared with the approximately 2.91 million share average of the other 184 trading days. Volume Compared With the Other 184 Sessions... - May 27th 82.45 million shares 28.4× the other-day average - May 28th 291.50 million shares 100.3× the other-day average - September 30th 58.94 million shares 20.3× the other-day average - October 1st 163.47 million shares 56.2× the other-day average - October 2nd* 27.69 million shares 9.5× the other-day average *Again, October 2nd reflects the volume recorded when the numbers were pulled that day. October 1st is particularly notable inside that second window. Approximately 163.5 million shares traded during the session, more than 56 times the average volume of the other 184 trading days, while GNS still finished the day down approximately 6.4%. Heavy volume, by itself, clearly did not guarantee lasting upward price movement. Across the remaining 184 sessions, GNS recorded approximately 534.8 million shares of volume, or about 46.1% of the period total. Put another way, every other trading day from January 2 through October 2 combined still produced less volume than those five sessions. The distribution is therefore difficult to describe as simply a few active days inside an otherwise busy year. Nearly one-third of the period's total volume came from two sessions in May, another 21.6% came from three sessions spanning September 30 through October 2, and both windows contained sharp upward price movement followed by substantial retracement. None of those numbers, standing alone, identify the cause. They do not establish manipulation, naked shorting, wash trading, spoofing, or any other specific mechanism. They establish what happened in the trading record...extreme concentration, enormous turnover, two narrow clusters, sharp price expansion, and meaningful retracement. Keeping those observations separate from possible explanations is exactly what my personal standard requires. It's not what you know, it's what you can prove....and that is what "we (retail)" are working on currently. Key Takeaway: From January 2nd through the time the numbers were pulled on October 2nd, approximately 1.159 billion GNS shares had traded across 189 sessions. Just five of those sessions accounted for 624,045,903 shares, or 53.9% of the entire reported total. Those five days averaged roughly 43 times the volume of the other 184 trading sessions, May 28th alone traded roughly 100 times the outside group daily average, and every one of the five dates fell inside one of only two concentrated trading windows. The numbers do not tell us what caused the activity. They do show exactly where the year's trading concentration occurred and how far those five sessions stood apart from everything around them. OneLove and StayBlessed Numbers Over Narratives DiggerBG NFA/DYODD #GNS @geniusacademyai #StockMarket #MarketStructure #TradingVolume #PriceAction #Retail #SmallCaps #DiggerBG @rogerhamilton

My follower count is fluctuating again, and the hate DMs are starting to come in, so let me make something crystal clear... I don’t give a shit about keeping an irrelevant X number up by telling people what they want to hear. I respect the people who choose to follow me, and I’m grateful for your time...BUT I’m not changing my values, morals or how I investigate and write to validate anybody’s echo chamber. That limits personal growth and critical thinking, including my own. I have zero interest in that lane. I’m still holding thousands of #GNS shares, as I have for years, and I’m 100% pro-retail. Asking hard questions does not mean I’ve turned against the company. Transparency matters, and shareholders staying quiet won’t make it happen. I haven’t worn a suit in over 15 years, even for normal everyday shit; my skin is allergic at this point. That last part was a joke...my commitment to retail though is not. Hyping, bashing, bulling or bearing just to pick a side isn’t my style. Without evidence, those are different ass cheeks on the same ass. Retail gains nothing from competing narratives that leave the facts behind. TRUTH, FACTS and TRANSPARENCY help us make informed decisions. That is what I’ll keep pushing and fighting for, including when the answers challenge my own investment. ChartExchange reports 58,937,916 shares traded on September 30th and another 144,811,986 by 12:47:09 p.m. ET on October 1st (today), a combined 203,749,902. Other providers report a different September 30th total, so the session coverage does need reconciliation. The same shares can trade repeatedly; this is reported turnover, not 203 million unique shares. Today's count at that timestamp was approximately 24.3 times ChartExchange’s displayed 30 day average of 5,961,579 shares. At 12:45 p.m. ET, MarketWatch showed the stock down 4.72%, trading around $0.15. An overnight report described an after-hours move to $0.22+ before the price returned toward $0.15. These intraday snapshots show extraordinary activity alongside a reversal of the reported after hours advance. The H1 release, the RICO claims surviving dismissal and another million-share insider purchase arrived in the same news window. H1 still showed a consolidated net loss, surviving dismissal allows the case to proceed without establishing liability, and a personal purchase does not cancel shares. Positive headlines do not guarantee gains....BUT “stocks go up and down” is a fucking inadequate response to questions about what produced this much turnover while the advance unwound. Citadel Securities and Virtu Americas deserve direct scrutiny. GNS investors have brought specific allegations of spoofing and naked short selling against them. Their role as major market makers should carry a corresponding obligation to answer for their trading conduct. Investigators should establish their participation in this activity and determine whether the records show the practices alleged against them. The recent RICO ruling concerns different defendants...it does not resolve the Citadel/Virtu allegations. The IBKR borrow update at 12:33:19 p.m. ET showed 700,000 shares available at a 4.99% CTB. Earlier today, the feed showed 2.1 million available at 5:29 a.m. and a 4.73% fee. That is a two-thirds reduction in availability between those observations and a 0.26 percentage point fee increase. Inventory fluctuated and was replenished along the way; the 12:33 p.m. figures were unchanged from 11:46 a.m. This shows tightening between the cited early morning and midday observations in one broker’s feed, not a continuous decline or a shortage across the entire lending market. I suspect manipulation, and I want that suspicion tested against the actual records. SEC Enforcement, FINRA Market Regulation and NYSE American’s regulatory staff...examine the orders, cancellations, executions and settlement activity across venues. Determine whether anyone created false impressions of supply or demand, generated misleading trading activity, or violated applicable short-sale requirements. Identify those responsible for any violations, including Citadel or Virtu if the evidence leads there, and refer evidence of criminal conduct to the DOJ. Retail is piecing this together from public snapshots. The institutions responsible for oversight can examine the underlying records. Shareholders deserve findings explaining what produced the activity, whether violations occurred and, if so, what action followed. An explanation grounded in legitimate trading would also matter. The demand is for an examination that establishes the facts, rather than dismissing the questions with “normal volatility.” Holding shares does not require me to defend every company decision or accept every explanation for the trading. Following me does not require you to agree with every conclusion, either. Disagreement is welcome... demanding that I bend the evidence to protect a position gets us nowhere though. My two cents won’t be for everyone, and that’s perfectly fine...you still have your other 98 cents to run with. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG #GNS #DiggerBG #NumbersOverNarratives #RetailInvestors #MarketTransparency #MarketStructure #CitadelSecurities #Virtu #SEC #FINRA @citsecurities @SECGov @SECPaulSAtkins @VirtuFinancial @rogerhamilton @geniusacademyai

Still reconciling numbers....but sometimes, it's nice just to sit back and watch the show. #GNS #TickTock #Vertex #FlyWheel

One thing y’all will learn about me: I don’t sell wolf tickets. Enjoy y’all’s week. I’ve got new information, a new shovel, and a reconciliation date with that dirty one sitting in the corner. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG NFA/DYODD #GNS #GeniusGroup #NumbersOverNarratives #DueDiligence #ShareStructure #CapitalStructure #Jewel #PFW #Retail #MarketStructure #Reconciliation #Digging #DYODD @rogerhamilton

Sometimes when you’re digging, you reach a fork in the road where the evidence seems to point one way, intent appears to point another, the numbers begin pulling somewhere else, and the prevailing narrative is already racing ahead of all of them. That is where investigating becomes dangerous, because incomplete evidence leaves open space, and open space has a bad habit of getting filled by emotion, assumption, and whatever conclusion people already wanted to reach. Once that happens, the narrative can begin winning before the facts ever get a chance to finish the fight. Speculation becomes certainty, certainty becomes reporting, and reporting gets repeated until people forget which pieces were actually established and which were simply assumed. By the time the remaining evidence arrives, that emotional tornado may have already done damage that cannot completely be taken back, which is why there are times when saying nothing is more responsible than adding another premature conclusion to the pile. Throughout my life, I have learned that a lot of people speak because silence makes them uncomfortable. Relevance is optional. During the “hurry up and wait” periods, noise fills the void while bull and bear echo chambers rally around whichever version of the story they already believed. I tend to use those periods differently, because silence does not mean I am disconnected, defeated, uninterested, or unaware. Sometimes it simply means I refuse to speak until the facts can be placed on the table in one organized line and tested against each other. That is what the last few weeks have looked like with my "173.4 Million" investigation, which started as an examination of GNS’s share structure and business numbers and expanded far beyond a single denominator. I have traced share counts across reporting periods, financing instruments, warrants and pre-funded warrants, repurchases, cancellations, DRS and custody mechanics, NAV calculations, insider and voting structures, transaction sequencing, corporate actions, disclosure changes, litigation context, and the points where numbers reported in different documents should mathematically connect. The work eventually moved well beyond the numbers themselves. Corporate governance questions led into Singapore law, the statutory framework surrounding different purchase methods and company actions, the difference between authorization and execution, and the distinction between legal and economic security states. Other branches required tracing disclosure timing, transaction mechanics, share classifications, possible explanations for changing counts, and the points where one reported figure should reconcile with the next. Some paths became stronger as the record developed, some weakened, some died completely, and others reached the edge of what the pre-H1 public record could actually answer. That last point matters now because this investigation was built before H1 arrived. The questions were already written down, the numerical bridges were already built, the unresolved branches were already identified, and the explanations that failed the record had already been discarded. H1 therefore does not get to rewrite the investigation backward. It gets added as a new evidentiary layer and tested against the structure that already existed before its release. With H1 now on the table, my response is not going to be a hype post or a bash post based on the headline. I am breaking down the business numbers on their own terms first, including the operating results, balance-sheet movements, share counts, capital activity, NAV-related figures, and the disclosures needed to understand how the period fits into the record that came before it. Only after that layer is laid out cleanly does it make sense to bring the pre-H1 investigation back into the room. My next step is to reverse engineer the share structure again from the new endpoint and compare that result with the structure already built from the prior record. One path works forward through the transactions while the other works backward from the newly reported position, and somewhere in the middle those paths should meet if the numbers, classifications, and transactions reconcile. Where they meet, I want to be able to show exactly why. Where they do not, I want to be able to show exactly where the separation occurs without filling the gap with speculation. That is why I have been quiet, and why I am still going to be careful now that H1 has been released. I have spent weeks working through hundreds of pages of filings, calculations, legal questions, transaction histories, competing explanations, and dead ends, and racing to become the loudest person in the room now would defeat the purpose of doing all of that work in the first place. The bull and bear echo chambers can keep arguing across the fork while I keep doing what I have been doing...organizing the filings, the math, the law, the transactions, the timeline, and now H1 into one evidentiary line. When that line is complete, I will follow wherever it leads and share my findings. Until then, the earmuffs stay on. OneLove and StayBlessed NumbersOverNarratives DiggerBG NFA/DYODD #GNS #GeniusGroup #NumbersOverNarratives #DueDiligence #ShareStructure #CapitalStructure #NAVPS #RetailInvestors #MarketResearch #H1 #DYODD @rogerhamilton

Hoooooook Em'! #UT #CollegeFootball #ArchManning #HookEm #LongHorns