for me, the validity of a biased short seller in Street Sweeter releasing a negative analysis on Mitek can be compared to Cruz telling the voters in Iowa that Carson is no longer in the race and went home!!!
Since when do individuals or organizations that hold a short position have the opportunity to release a major negative "hit" piece where they stand to have significant profit as result?
to that end, it is interesting that the CEO, CFO and general manage all sold shares on May 2,2016. Is that a coincidence or an underlying reason (where there is smoke is there always fire?)
I still remember the pain when the stock price reached close to 7.5 several years ago and management announced secondary offering around 5.25 and stock price plummeted.
it seems that we shareholders are victims of a stock "that never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity". For the last several months, everything seemed perfect with earnings, projections, new alliances and new customers. now this!!
it would be nice to have management respond to some of the key points in Street Sleeper's piece;
strength of IP, does USAA get to use mitek's technology free?, is USAA a threat in this sector?, can and will the banks and other financial institutions do their "own thing" or does it make more sense to outsource to company like Mitek?, are we ahead of most competitors?
not for management to answer, but are the payments to management higher and out of proportion to the size of the company and its revenues or are they justifiable rewards for a "job well done so far" and support the fact that often you have "to spend money to make money, and higher top people"
still long and hope that this was a unjustifiable hit piece from someone with vested interest to knock Mitek
AEZS has lost countless millions ( any idea how much?) over the years trying to get approval for drugs in its pipeline. If purchased, do these losses transfer to the buyer with considerable tax savings? If so, besides acquiring a drug with retail value there should be considerable tax advantages reducing the actual cost to buyer. True?
0 for 2 for this very long, hoping company can go 1/3 and learned from previous mistakes in phase 3 trials
been investor in this company unfortunately longer than can remember; previous phase 3 studies on BPH and colon cancer failed miserably and unexpectedly and in retrospect the phase 2 studies did not have enough patients enrolled and also failed with growth hormone. So, AEZS has very poor track record (apparently not uncommon in late phase studies among biotechs). For those that are better at evaluating the structure of these studies, did they learn anything from their previous failures? Did they have enough enrolled in phase 2 to be reliable indicator for phase 3? Structured properly to meet scrutiny of FDA?
And we all know if the results are poor what we can expect of the stock price but what if the results are positive, encouraging ( mildly? very good?) what about the stock price? results released when?
Then what to expect from ovarian? prostate and other trials: