I could tell you why insiders sold, but you probably don't care about the answer.
You are short and are just trying to convince people to sell.
I've already posted the complete, documented proof of what exactly led to the insider selling at least 5 times.
Watch out for mothra's posts. she is a huge contradiction - i.e, from earlier today:
She reminds me of the old tale of the "siren's song".
Is she short, or long, or short, or long, or both, or not at all,...etc.
Ok, she is likely a one-minute chart day trader who feels the need to talk to someone all day, that is all. Just be aware not to take her minute-to-minute positions too seriously because before you blink, they have probably changed.
GL to all
Because they probably own it at 2.00 or lower!!
Are you really that stupid??? It goes to 35.. if they would sell, you would say the same...If it goes to 50... and they sell, you say the same... Get real idiot, WTF!!!
This is ridiculous. I have a friend who is VP of a company- name you would know but cannot tell. It was a 2.00 +/- stock for years. It has gone up a lot- another biotech- and he sold tons over the years. Why not? In the beginning, screams of insider selling from shareholders but then everyone realized it happens, esp. when you do own thousands of shares and perhaps put your life into it. And in his company more than several sold but again why else do they own the shares and believe in the company. A few top execs who sold on recent run up if true is TYPICAL and reasonable. JMHO
I do not think there is any "insider selling" today!? THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO REPORT THEM IF THE INSIDER SELLS. Right?
I am confused by the reference to Barron in the news section of DNDN. The links shows the first paragraph, then stops... it looks like a sales lead to their business.
I checked the SEC Filings by DNDN on Ameritrade, two insider sales, one on Apr/16 and one on Apr/22. That means both are before the Apr/28 announcement. (The insiders cannot sell with inside bad news.) So this is old news...
unless Barron has some new news, but Barron is not showing us the full article.
1) Has anybody read the full article in Barron came out today?
2) If Barron is talking about old news and then show this info half-way, I wonder about their intention?
Any insights or comments?
because if you had thousands upon thousands of shares, would you take a little profit and buy whatever you like after all those years. It not like they dumped all their shares. Let's get real here, this thing is still on the way up...