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

Oncolytics Biotech, Inc. Message Board

  • xxxscoutxxx xxxscoutxxx Dec 4, 2012 11:14 AM Flag

    The "Fools" are at it again. Bashing ONCY

    They are such jerks.


    Sentiment: Strong Buy

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I think the stock being held tightly is why it continues to hold above $2. The idiot on Motley Fools claiming "Reolysin is not active" and not sharing how he arrived at that conclusion clearly isn't shaking longs out of the stock until we get our phase III results. I am seriously considering buying more even having the largest paper loss I've ever had but will wait and see if the market makers succeed in driving the stock lower and then buy if it drops below $2 again. Thanks to all the posters that detail the results scenarios They've made me conclude the risk reward at this price is too attractive to ignore. I wonder if the Motley fool idiot will acknowledge his total stupidity if the phase IIII results show "Reolysin" is very active in cancer cells. I take heart looking at the chart for Inhibix, INHX which the market incorrectly had languishing in the sub.50 cent range for months three years prior to it being bought out for $26 in February 2011. To all ONCY investors: Don't let these know nothing experts at Motley Fool get you to part with your stock at these absurd prices.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • I know very well the president is denied the power to control the purse. And that he won't get it. And even if he did from some democratically controlled congress gone wild SCOTUS would declare it unconstitutional and shoot it down. It's a red herring and you know it.

      "More common knowledge point Rockerfeller owns both Exxon and Harvard..". Geezus rmd, make sense willya? Rockefeller doesn't "own" exxon and hasn't even owned the standard oil conglomerate for decades. Public employee penson funds have long been exxon's major owners. And R doesn't own Harvard either.

      Why did O refuse to allow development of US oil reserves? Fact: we are now producing more oil and gas domestically than we have in thirty years. Did your president cancel oil leases on public lands - Yes. For the best of reasons: use 'em or lose 'em - the long term holders were just sitting on them so those sources were contributing nothing to our oil supply. Do you get all your material from faux noise??? Talk about a limited knowledge base..

      I am not an unquestioning fan of the administration and its policies. I think calling pelosi and reid leaders is a contradiction in terms. And I have no idea what their platform really is. But your ship of fools (santorum, bachman, beck, limpbag, trump, cain etc) who declare climate change and evolution a hoax and believe life begins at penetration and that the FBI and AG and virtually every investigatory body was part of a conspiracy to create Obama's phony birth certificate is being discredited in the public's eye not by the liberal media but rather by their own acts and speeches and beliefs. You put the lunatic fringe out there as your leaders and then can't seem to understand the results.

      I know there's no reo news but I don't want to go on with this.

      • 2 Replies to d2foxes
      • I know there's no reo news but I don't want to go on with this."

        Too bad. You are up to your earrings in it. The point is :the overreach by the Pres. He knows that the cookie jar is off limits, but he had to try. That shows disregard to the rules(Constitution). He has been talking enough about disregarding the law, like instructing which laws the Justice dept should ignore and not apply. And how he wants to change the Constitution. It is those little droppings your dear child is exposing you to, which are going to stink up the house. If you don't put an end to it at the beginning you are going to live in misery until you get rid of the little monster. You can bet it will try to test your limits and more times than not, will do things behind your back that are going to cost you.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • Soon they will say life begins with a gleam in the eye.

    • Well, I have to agree 100% with, "I'm fairly confident that Reolysin is inactive"....... Of course it is inactive in normal cells. It is about as benign as a virus can be. On the other hand if you happen to introduce this benign, "inactive" virus to certain cells and or cell clusters, well things get a little more interesting.

    • They're worse than jerks. I can't even say what I think they are. I'm new to this board but have been invested in ONCY for about 3 years. I don't get why anyone would cheer for a company to fail or even worse for a potential revolutionary cancer treatment to fail. If ONCY turns out to be a success and cancer patients have new hope from Reolysin, I think Motley Fool should be put up for ridicule and loose every ounce of credibility in the investment world !!!

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • M/F they either do not know how the trials are being conducted, or else they must figure there are hundreds of people running a huge scam, that a lot of Institutions are falling for. How can they reasonably suggest that with all the trials run to date that Reolyson is inactive. My guess would be they are the ones trying to run a scam past the investment community.Good Luck all.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • Scout...Agreed. What is this now,the fourth Hit piece by the Fools? Sadly some holders will sell when the Fools "News" pops up on the screen and the Plunge begins. Those shares shaken loose are nothing short of a GIFT to those of us who acquire them! I am still needing thirty or forty thousand "Stocking Stuffers" this Holiday Season...

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • 1 Reply to bridgeconstructor
      • The Fool's basher is one of many dozens of members who blog thru MF. This is I think his third slam on ONC. Why they showcase him is uncertain. It may be that he has a established record of being about 80% on the money. Or that he is a practicing MD. He went to Harvard and Duke, seems to be in his mid forties and religiously follows an awful lot of biotechs. AFAIK he specializes in neither oncology nor genetics but is a general practitioner. (Altho given his NIC he may be interested in melanoma.) I would assume he understands the trial process and the biochemistry. Taltell and rjc's thorough DD may know more about Dr Friedman's expertise and motivation than I. FWIW.

0.330.00(0.00%)Nov 4 4:00 PMEST