The author spends a lot of time:
1) Discounting totally MDB Capital's success in its involvement with VHC and MDVN
2) Trying to prove that he is not just cherry picking cases, and that MDB Capital is just a Pump and Dump operation
3) Heavily implying conspiracy and possible fraud because the research reports have been taken off of their website.
4 ) Heavily suggesting that there is zero basis to the unnamed OEM because none of the disclosures HE thinks UNXL should have made at the time were made, but overlooking the fact that what WAS disclosed was the concrete fact a $15 million engineering contract was secured in order to build out capacity by this unnamed OEM in exchange for dedicated supply and preferred pricing.
5) Not addressing the technology
6) Not adressing the potential markets
7) Not addressing the backgrounds and qualifications of the company's principals
8) Proving that he is more guiltly of cherry picking the facts to support his short thesis than what he will admit.
From the SA Article
Conclusion -- a Few Questions Investors Should Ask Themselves
Many bullish investors will no doubt continue to ask what does any of this have to do with Unipixel or its billion dollar technology.
These investors (and authors) will point out that Unipixel is somehow different simply because they have performed such extensive and specific analysis on Unipixel's described technology. I have quite deliberately refrained from making any evaluation of Unipixel's technology.
In the past many investors have taken the brief and vague press releases issued by numerous MDB clients and repeatedly extrapolated billion dollar market caps and 20 bagger stocks. They have based their predictions on analysis that is every bit as rigorous as that which has been recently published on Unipixel. However, as with Unipixel, the underlying information (press releases) on which they based their analysis was often very vague and open to a wide range of interpretations. As with Unipixel, these investors (and authors) presented in writing the most spectacular conceivable outcomes based on a tiny shred of incomplete information.
In November 2012, shares of Unipixel were trading at around $6.00-$7.00 on average volume of just 50,000 shares per day. Starting two days before the December 7th press release this began to change. The volume more than quadrupled and the share price reached a high of $8.50. It seems clear that this material information was not a well kept secret. Following the press release the low float stock then surged to over $15.00 on substantial volume, a double from the previous week.
Investors should take the time to re-read the press release and ask what does it actually say vs. what it is just heavily implying. Investors should ask themselves why Unipixel could not give any more information that what it has provided. Competitive secrets could still be maintained by any company even while giving investors substantially more information upon which to make an investment decision.
Investors should then ask themselves why the experienced investors who are calling this stock a near term 20 bagger failed to make any mention of the disclosures from MDB Capital. These disclosures include ownership of a large stake (including free warrants) in Unipixel by MDB, use of unregistered analysts in Nicaragua to write bullish reports and the right to sell as a principal as well as to go short Unipixel. The authors writing these articles have made heavy reference to the MDB reports such that simply not seeing this disclosure would seem highly unlikely. These authors have made repeated mention of various discussions with MDB bankers, but never mentioned the notable history of stock implosions and discontinued research following MDB's involvement.
And now the research reports from MDB have all been pulled from MDB's web site just as the stock begins to plunge on very heavy volume every single day. The information was made fully available as the stock was rising such that it could be widely cited by bullish authors. But now it is gone.
References to MDB's historical case studies which touted numerous high fliers (gains of up to 1,000%) have also been removed, but only after these stocks imploded to as low as the pennies.
Investors should ask themselves why has all of this information been removed without explanation ? And why has this sudden removal coincided with a steady drop in the share price of more than 30% on heavy daily volume ?
For those who feel they have an answer, I always welcome any feedback.