Arguably The Worst Stock Picker ever born on this planet
To the MNTA Ihub moderator
1.every tidbit of any MNTA news that happened in the LAST 3 years was mostly positive
2. any negative event, was either neutral or even positive
3. and after spending 5,000 hours on message board and posting at least 10000 messages with various log-ins your performance is negative 40%?
4 you, your various log-ins and your cohorts posted some 300 messages for daily exclusivity on generic lovenox. when many said it is immaterial and excessive to post this daily, considering 1 day in 2 years another generic comes to market, you did not listen
5. you said Amphastar ANDA is a joke, when investors raised concern about their ANDA
6. you said Amphastar and MNTA will settle during the PI phase
7. you said Nobody will get generic lovenox approved other than MNTA and you were vehement about it
8. you deleted many many posts that highlighted risks in investing in MNTA and you maintained MNTA message board replete with your positive spin. Don't know what your intent is?
9. Copaxone - MNTA/NVS vs Teva High probability (77%?) that MNTA will win patent case.
I am glad to nominate you for the WORST STOCK PICKER EVER born on this planet.
Nine strikes and the whole side is out! I am not sure what team is at bat now; but it is not MNTA. Even a "tentative" copaxone approval would not have the energizing effect on stock price. MNTA has become a "one-trick pony" who's trick can be done anywhere.
There were lots of clowns on this board who pretty much fit that list: brilliant prognosticators like perryfinker, who KNEW what was going to happen. Not might, should, would, probability etc - he KNEW. Got a degree in everything from University of Wikipedia, he did. Bet he's disappeared. But take your pick, he was just an example, there were many.
I have no problem with people who are excited with their stock, even if they miss some of the pitfalls. Everyone seems to have missed the possibility that the M'enox patent would be unenforceable. (Why would they award a patent?) I have to be realistic now as the 9 strikes you list make this a greater "long shot" than in 2004.
Do you even understand what the court's decision was? They said nothing of MNTA's patent. What they said is companies are allowed to extend safe harbor laws into commercialization. A pretty ludicrous interpretation, but that's the courts.