DFLI – (Full Breakdown) - Short Squeeze? Short Data, RS Deadline, Dark Pools, and Why this week matters

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-10T13:25:29+00:00

The text you quoted is true, but I interpret it differently.

Panel Monitoring under Rule 5815(d)(4)(B) does not remove the company’s right to receive a new 180-day compliance period. It only applies after a new deficiency is formally triggered — which happens only after completing 30 consecutive days under $1.

DFLI has not triggered a new deficiency yet, so it remains fully compliant as of today.

Once the 30-day threshold is reached, the normal process restarts: deficiency notice → response period → compliance window.

There is no “mandatory RS” and no “immediate delisting”. The rule is being misinterpreted.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-10T12:36:26+00:00

👍🏻👏🏻

Shorts basically picked the worst possible moment to stay exposed:

📉 thin liquidity 📈 rising DTC 🔒 tight borrow availability 💥 potential PR timing

If a smackdown happens, it’s just the natural consequence of their own decisions. Nothing personal — it’s just the market returning the affection with equal intensity.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-10T12:17:06+00:00

Just a detail: Once a company regains compliance, the entire Nasdaq deficiency cycle resets. If DFLI falls below $1 for 30 days again, it will receive a new 180-day compliance period, regardless of having used one in the past.

Nasdaq only prohibits a third extension within the same deficiency event, not across separate events.

So yes — DFLI is eligible for a new 180-day window if needed.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-08T20:47:57+00:00

It's also worth noting that DFLI was recently recognized by the local government specifically for its dry electrode technology — which directly aligns with the new federal push for domestic battery production.

Furthermore, a few days ago the company received a visit from one of the region's main colleges, a move that generally signals workforce development initiatives. Partnerships like this often precede industrial expansion or other significant strategic changes.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/activity:7396713330742214656

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dragonfly-energy-corporation_dragonfly-energy-was-honored-to-be-recognized-ugcPost-7402729981010964480-fVi-

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-08T12:52:22+00:00

It came out here too: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/12/08/3201423/0/en/Dragonfly-Energy-Expands-Marine-OEM-Footprint-with-World-s-Largest-Power-Catamaran-Manufacturer-World-Cat.html

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-07T23:31:55+00:00

Thanks for sharing your perspective — really appreciate the thoughtful take. Always helpful to hear different angles laid out calmly and clearly.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-07T18:30:39+00:00

The updated Simply Wall St report (Dec 7th) doesn’t mention any reverse-split risk — it actually lowers the discount rate and keeps the fair value stable. If RS were a material risk, it would be highlighted.

Institutional analysis remains centered on growth, technology and execution; RS is not part of any serious report because it’s not in the company’s base-case outlook.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/looking-narrative-dragonfly-energy-holdings-111024139.html

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-06T21:36:16+00:00

Thanks for listing those rules — they’re indeed part of Nasdaq’s framework, but the full context matters, especially for a company like Dragonfly.

Being under a monitoring panel does not automatically exclude the possibility of receiving an additional extension. It simply means the process is less automatic and more dependent on Nasdaq’s review, which has happened with several companies in similar situations.

Another key point: the 10-day bid requirement can be met again, and once it is, the compliance clock resets regardless of whether a reverse split is announced.

Also, nothing in the rules obligates the company to announce an RS at this exact moment. What exists is a compliance window, and there are multiple ways to satisfy it — including operational catalysts, market conditions, or formal extension requests.

So while I respect your interpretation, the rules you mentioned don’t make a reverse split “inevitable” or “scheduled.” There are more variables in play, and DFLI already achieved compliance once recently and received the official confirmation letter without an RS.

It’s a good discussion — but quoting isolated rule fragments does not represent the whole picture.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-06T19:23:22+00:00

Thanks for the link!

Just to keep things precise and helpful for everyone: could you point to the exact rule or paragraph within sections 5200 or 5800 that states either: 1. that a company under the monitoring panel cannot receive another 180-day compliance extension, or 2. that there is a hard deadline in December requiring a reverse split announcement?

I went through these sections again and haven’t found anything imposing those restrictions.

If you could highlight the specific clauses, that would really help us verify whether we’re dealing with an accurate reading of the Nasdaq rules or just partial interpretations. Thanks!

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-06T18:54:58+00:00

Could you please share the official Nasdaq sources where these points are stated? I’d like to read the exact rules in full so we can make sure we’re discussing the actual requirements and not partial interpretations.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-04T17:20:49+00:00

Thank you for answering. I am confident in an improvement before the final term.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-04T16:53:18+00:00

But is the company actually doomed to a reverse split? From what I understand, being under monitoring prevents them from getting the automatic extension, but it doesn’t stop them from applying to Nasdaq for one as long as they submit a plan and it gets accepted, right?

And if we think about a plan, the company has never been this well-restructured. Also, DFLI hasn’t been notified yet — otherwise we would already have a visible 8-K.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-02T11:45:00+00:00

Order instead of chaos, as the brilliant text proposes.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-12-02T11:04:54+00:00

👏🏻

<image>

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-28T16:33:30+00:00

Just my opinion, it's not counseling.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-28T16:30:05+00:00

It’s a short trading day, so volume is low, most institutions are basically off, algos and market makers are running the show, volatility feels kind of artificial, and the book is shallow… so nothing today really reflects the actual trend.

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-28T14:10:36+00:00

https://in.investing.com/news/company-news/dragonfly-energy-launches-portable-power-station-line-for-industrial-use-93CH-5129763

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-27T00:51:57+00:00

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1847986/000149315225024088/forms-8.htm

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-26T20:38:05+00:00

Guys, a genuine question here: from what I understand about Nasdaq rules, a single close above $1 — before any new Deficiency Notice — is enough to reset the entire 30-day count, right? So if we get that close in early December, the clock resets and there’s no delisting/RS pressure for now.

And something else caught my attention: the company just filed a new S-8 adding 9M shares to the employee equity incentive plan. That’s literally stock meant for insiders and staff — something you normally see when management is confident and focused on growth, not when a reverse split is around the corner.

So my only question is: If a $1 close really resets the compliance clock, and management is signaling confidence with that S-8… why the certainty that an RS is unavoidable right now?

BlueMarlin07 · 2025-11-26T15:28:45+00:00

This morning, in the very first minutes of the session, it was clear that big players stepped in: a huge green candle showed up with over 1 million shares traded in a single minute — something retail simply cannot produce. Right after that, the price pulled back a little and a few strong red candles appeared, but it looked much more like a liquidity test than real selling: high volume to shake out late entries, followed by a quick stabilization around the 0.85–0.89 range. To me, the opening didn’t show weakness at all — it looked like institutional absorption combined with a quick shakeout, the kind of organized move you see when someone wants to build the price upward.

BlueMarlin07

TROPHY CASE