"It is true that 95 % of what you post is comprised of hard information but it is also true that 95% of your conclusions and prognostications based on that information has been dead wrong."
- here are four very recent observations -
June 30 - "it's a reasonable assumption that a QIDP designation may need to be warranted by virtue of a given level of pseudomonas kill in these results."
June 29 - "I suspect an angle almost completely overlooked by investors aware of INSM is that the FDA, EMEA, CDC, WHO and other agencies Worldwide which have responsibility for addressing threats to public health might have a vested interest in the success of both Arikace and Insmed's liposomal delivery platform."
June 29 - "The main threat would be if a large proportion of those who participated in this study lived in countries such as the UK, where Colistin(?) is usually prescribed because it has a similar pseudomonas kill to Tobi."
June 28 - "All of the clues we've had so far are certainly pointing to the tracker funds getting their shares for $12. But if we ignored the additional shares issued since 2011 that would assign the same 2011 value to the Company. Back in 2011 the Phase III study hadn't started, and the safety of Arikace hadn't yet been determined (in fact a Clinical Hold was on the way due to a safety issue). This year we have an all-clear on the animal studies, and we're looking forward to Phase III results which we have every reason to believe will knock all competitive drugs out of the park. Being that much nearer commercialisation in itself warrants a higher valuation. A similar valuation simply doesn't make sense - unless those supplying the shares have got wind of a problem with the results."
Are you claiming any of the above as examples of me being wrong?
If not - to support your "95% wrong" allegation you already need to find 76 examples of my being wrong.
Can we expect any response from you apart from silence?
I'll address the two most recent comments of yours which offer the greatest visibility on your capacity for contributing anything of value to other users of this forum.
1. "7-1-13 you stated that 2.5 million shares took the share price from $8.50 to $10.50 indicating that the buying pressure proved the shares where undervalued. When in fact, the share price that morning went from $13+ to 8.50 and closed somewhere in the $9.72 range down from 11.96 previous day close resulting in a loss of over 18+% on Monday. Buying pressure? Wrong."
Here are the actual numbers from July 1 copied directly from the Nasdaq site. It's immaterial to my point, but I'm certain the vast majority who use this forum will know that the price opened at $9.23 because a relatively small volume of trading in pre-market took the price as low as $8.
Date ............... Open ... High ... Low ... Close ... Volume
Only a profoundly intellectually-challenged individual would be unable to understand that at some stage during the day the trading drove the share price from its low of $9.00 to its high of $10.65.
Those of us who were watching know that the move was the result of far and away the heaviest trading that day, and that the subsequent drop from $10.65 to the Close of $9.72 occurred on far lighter volume, after the main buying pressure had eased off.
5. "And my all time favorite, Insmed going to $800. Wrong."
You must be severely mentally ill to delude yourself for one second that anybody here believes you can see the future.