Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Implant Sciences Corp. Message Board

  • inciteful_investor inciteful_investor Mar 31, 2005 8:14 PM Flag

    Question for the RAH, RAH Longs

    After listening to the CC, did any of the RAH, RAH longs find anything even remotely negative about the call? I listened to the call yesterday as it was happening, then re-listened later after reading the messages here. Made a list of both the positives and the negatives. While most of the positives have already been mentioned here, very few of the negatives were brought up. I think the positives outweigh the negatives...say 70% vs. 30%...but it's hard to put a number on that. You just get an overall consensus..or "feel" for it. I felt it was overall positive. Since OSIS was at the top of my list (from a few months ago)...I have to like it. <s>
    It still baffles me that some longs here just simply refuse to look at the whole picture when it comes to investing though. Facts/issues that aren't to your liking, are just simply ignored or discarded. I just don't understand this investing strategy. But hey, if it works for you...go for it! I've often wondered what the mentality was of the investors that rode companies like ENRON to the bottom. After reading the IMX board for the last year+, I wonder no more. There are some filled with such blind optimism, that they just simply ignore any warning signs.
    There are very few here that like to look at both sides of a story. You have to look at both the "pros" and "cons" of ANY stock you invest in. In a beaten down stock like IMX, any kind of negative interpretation on this CC was going to bring it down...even though the positives outweigh the negatives 2 to 1 (or most likely more). This partnership is obviously good for IMX...they have already proven that they cannot do it on their own. But...ANY weakness in an already beaten down stock just adds to investor frustration and selling...and the shorts (like sharks smelling blood in the water) getting on board just adds to that fuel.
    Here's just a quick example of a negative in the CC that hasn't been brought up already (to my knowledge). A caller asked Armini about IMX's cash flow...I think his original question was about an upfront payment to IMX by OSIS. Armini answered something like this: "If we need money, I'll do what any good CEO would do...raise more money". If anybody recalls, we saw what happened when IMX announced the Private Placement recently. Most on this board don't understand what a PP is, or how if affects shareholder value...even though myself (and many others) tried to explain it. If IMX were to "raise more money" (at shareholder expense) AGAIN in 2005...well that would be the death of this stock...not the company...but the stock. At IMX's current cash burn rate...they better get sales SOON! Or at least a significant payment from OSIS...SOON! They can't continue to burn cash...and have their other divisions losing money. If they have to re-submit to the NAVY...well that just KILLS the hope of sales from them...for another year or so. I think (hope) some here learned a painful lesson about how a PP affects your shareholder value. If IMX were to do anything else to "raise cash" this year...well the post-PP drop we just saw would seem minor compared to any new news in this area. IMX would very easily get cut in half again on any money raising adventures offered by IMX. It would also show that the OSIS agreement wasn't working as advertised.
    Another thing mentioned in CC...that IMX could still sell their "existing" QS's under their own label. How many do they have in inventory? Not very many from what we've been told. 6-10 in stock maybe...Whoop-De-Doo. Bet many of you didn't think of the FEW points I brought up tonight...did ya?
    I could on and on, but some get angry when I make LONG posts, or when I'm not 100% on the RAH, RAH bandwagon...so I'm gonna keep this one short. <s>

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Another good one, thanks. eom.

    • Yo, jordan, thank you for that post. The PFG and IMX bashing is out of control. These limp dicks have a mob mentality and attack PFG just because she has the moxie to plunk down on something she believes in and defend it. The docertas and stockcatalysts and chezdorks of the world are always in the dark periphery, like hyenas, never taking chances themselves but quick to pounce when the danger has passed and the situation is clear and safe. There is no manhood nor honor in the attacks on PFG and I thank you for showing some objectivity and decency. Dealing with the pond scum here is almost a full time job, no one really has time for it, so I appreciate your comments and I'm sure she does too.

    • I'm sorry if you thought the pump comment was aimed at you directly. I meant it as a general statement for those who blindly tout a stock. I appreciate your reasons for your optimism and just wish I could be more convinced. Please don't ake offense at some of my posts as they are not meant to be personal. I just like to play Devil's Advocate as often times it helps me understand an issue better and sometimes even change my mind.

      As far as the movie, again, it was meant in the best of spirits. I thought a little levity was due this board after the last few days. The title, as I'm sure you realize, was just a play off of Sleepless in Seattle and certainly not meant to be mean spirited.

      Have a nice weekend!

    • "This is a highly speculative stock." "neither do I like people pumping stocks based on hope and faith."

      1. Why is it OK for YOU to be invested in IMX with a bad attitude and for me to be invested in IMX with a good attitude? If you are so highly intelligent and so down on "hope and faith," why would you EVER invest in ANY �speculative� stock? Your statements seem oxymoronic and hypocritical, and I say that most respectfully. I mean, chez, why not just sell and take your loss and move on?

      2. Please point to one "pump" on my part, just one exaggeration or misrepresentation.

      3. Loved your movie reviews--very funny, but not so crazy about the title.

    • "So, to come to POM's defence, she's attempting to predict future preformance of an unproven company with (supposedly) top-notch technology and limitless potential...hmmmm...just like everyone else on this board. Just because your estimation includes a hefty naysaying discount doesn't mean POM or anyone else here has unrealistic hopes or expectations."

      True dat! Its all about the future! If not, this would be a penny stock based on past performance. It continues to be my opinion that a speculative play on the explosives division is not worth the current share price because of risks with bringing the EDS products to market and because of the shaky state of the medical and semiconductor segments.

      We'll all see what is in store in the future. I feel safe that I can enter into a long position at prices lower or equal to the current price in 2-3 months.

    • Well I appreciate your response to my response, as well as your creating my very own, personalized movie review. I'm getting it tattooed on my chest right next to "IMX Thug 4 Life" and "Stop tattooing crap on your chest, you drunk summbich".

      I'm sure everyone here will agree it's a gamble and that even if one assumes the technology is the best, the company will not necessarily succeed, and even if the company succeeds, that doesn't mean our annualized return on investment will beat any index over any time period.

      That's what makes speculative stocks so fun to argue and complain about. We could be debating for days about whether BAC will beat analyst estimates by .01 or .005, or we can discuss whether we're all going to be stinking rich or just stinking, based on the implications of Dr. A's exact wording wrt the Navy order. The wide disparity of views is what keeps us coming back...really there is no reasonable way to value IMX at this point; if you think they'll make it or get bought out at a decent price, you buy; if not, not.

      But I'm sure we all appreciate your humor injections as we try to reassure ourselves that in the short term the SP won't hurt us too much, and to remember that it's not the crazy market's fault...it's the fault of the wiley market-maker with a lot more patience and clout than many of us.

    • Thanks for submitting your review of the movie Clueless in Connecticut.

      "I speculate this movie will be a classic in three years. It certainly met all of my hopes and expectations. A Top Notch film!"

    • I appreciate your response. The post was very well thought out and I agree that this is a highly speculative stock. But, to call the market stupid because of the recent PPS movement is absurd. It was that type of blind optimism that lead to the NASDAQ crash when Qualcomm, and most other internet stocks, were selling at unrealistic prices. It is just common sense that people buy this stock for its future promise but you can�t convince me this has any intrinsic value. I don�t like when people bash stocks with little substance behind their claims but neither do I like people pumping stocks based on hope and faith.

      By the way, I own both common and warrants and do hope it does well. But if it doesn�t I will certainly be the first one in line to admit it was leap of faith decision based on a wing and prayer. I look at IMX as I do playing Craps. I have roughly a 50/50 chance of winning and know going in there is certainly no promise of making any money. Let�s call this stock what it is; a gamble.

    • Yes, but at what price are all of these facts priced into the stock? This was all the case when IMX was around $10, so price movement can't be blamed on these facts. Obviously the stock is speculative....why else would people pay for negative earnings?

      The only real changes affecting the SP have been the PIPE and the partnership news. Even if the equity is diluted by the PIPE, the speculative point of view is supported by the OSIS news. The quickest way to get to profitability is to actually sell your product, which is a small part of the process which IMX has neglected until now. You're not paying for next year's earnings, you're paying for (hopefully) earnings 3 years from now that will demand a P/E greater than the avg. of 29.32 since IMX is a specualtive company and therefore cannot be compared with any major index.

      So, to come to POM's defence, she's attempting to predict future preformance of an unproven company with (supposedly) top-notch technology and limitless potential...hmmmm...just like everyone else on this board. Just because your estimation includes a hefty naysaying discount doesn't mean POM or anyone else here has unrealistic hopes or expectations.

    • Well, I am happy to re-post for you that direct quote from the CC:

      Dr. A to the Oppenheimer guy (repeat: Oppenheimer):

      �This is the best deal that we have made in a number of years. We have a win-win situation with a leader in the security marketplace, and if the stock market doesn�t understand that, I just don�t know what to tell them.�

      Have I ever said that the stock price could not go lower? I know you think I am an idiot, but after following IMX for almost three years now, there is NO predicting what this stock will do--today, tomorrow, six months or a year from now. As any good investor knows, it just depends, doesn't it? We go down on great news and up on no news, up on great news, down on no news.

      Other than the fact that we share some Italian heritage, I can assure you I am not related to Dr. A.

    • View More Messages
 
IMSC
0.41+0.01(+2.50%)Aug 26 3:54 PMEDT