No comment or inside buying right now is a very good thing. Everything quiet as per SEC requirements before partnership announcement.
On all volume days, large % is short. 40k today. I don't buy the settlement nonsense. Almost everything is electronic today. If trade is not initiated as a short by seller at brokerage or by mm, it will not register as a short. If I close a long position and hit a bid that is clearly company buyback, that is an agency trade and in no way could be treated as a short. And most of the buying has come from the buyback the last couple months. So, why all the shorting at finra? Because a short has been hitting the buyback bid many times. MM?
Its just a load of #$%$ that this fake supply provided by short has contained the benefit of the buyback.
I would appreciate your interpretation of RIOS's holdings. It may be that he never got the total 3 mill shares or restriction on some means he doesn't have to show. I don't know. It just appears from simple math that he sold some.
And I never meant to imply that Ma and management works in the gray. I think they are a little sloppy at times which is never a good thing for a BB stock. Ma is a science type. And my bias is that sometimes shareholder value gets lost to these guys. The buyback was a huge positive and Ma gets credit for that. But, it seems to be countered by that short.
Long term positives remain, but business plan missteps has cost us years in delay. 10k says vaso may indeed start its own trial. I would like to see money spent there. Better late than never.
As it pertains to the subject of shares held, Rios is, as you say, a director but it appears he is not filing as he should. He was given 3 million shares on march of 2011, but the 10k for april of 2013 shows him only holding 1,475,000 shares. The shares were restricted when he first got them, but I would assume they are no longer. But, even if restricted, he would still have to show proper amount on 10k.? Why no form 4?
Vaso is not great handling the legal form 4's as Beecher's last 2 were filed as if they were open market purchases when they were related to option awards.
This company pays lawyers for this, why cant they get it right? It gives the appearance of impropriety. lets go Ma.....................
That's all great tfitz, but is just another of the many anecdotal stories about eecp. Without real trial results, nothing will change here.
Today was a pathetic day of trading. After a volume breakout, we slide right back on no volume. Shareholders who have been here for decades deserve better.
All I can say is that I don't want to hear any excuses about this Q. I don't want to see sg&a eating up revs. If they cant get expenses in line than maybe they need to cut. Starting at the top; salaries. I have no problem with Ma and Co getting top dollar at this penny stock company IF shareholders are making money too. Clearly, right now, the larges is going to management only.
Ma has failed shareholders on cms coverage, gettiing more products to sell from GE or other top medical companies, hiring and overcompensating for failed execs(rios, Dempsey, and recent seimens guy), starting a company run fda approved trial......................................
Time is running out for Ma. This is not china. Shareholders are not part of some 100 year plan to dominate the medical device sector. We want a reasonable profit in a reasonable amount to time. What say you Ma??????
Its hard to say what he has now. He doesn't have to file a 4 cause he is not an "insider" and doesn't own 5%. He got 3 million shares. Maybe he is still an owner. Maybe not/
Dr Ma is getting more and more support for better insurance coverage of eecp.
Do you have any facts or articles or comments from docs supporting this claim.
Without stonybrook, which Ma and Vaso have little to do with, eecp would have no credible trials going on to give eecp the cred it deserves. An fda approved trial should have been started 3 years ago, about the time hey gave all those shares to Rios. This is a decision by Ma which has cost shareholders years. That is a fact. And Ma should be held accountable for that very poor decision.
Don't you get it? By cashing out and selling, they lower exposure and buy shares at a lower price if sngx puts more to them. They aren't investing here, they are money changers who just want to pocket free shares. They are the worst.
Stock has not trade well since the Lincoln deal; that is no coincidence. Management should take this as lesson learned. They tried to put lipstick on that pig in terms of finance deal, but market has voted. And that is all that counts.
They didn't need the money right away, and they still do not. Let Lincoln have their "payment" shares and look to do a real finance deal next year after some good data. DO NOT put any more shares to Lincoln. Give them the boot..........
Hey Sno. have you ever heard argument below on the finra short #'s. It was presented on another board. I don't agree, but wanted your thoughts.
Those figure are misleading because they actually represent a function of how the MM's often handle transactions. For example if a long puts in a sell order of 10000 shares of VASO thru their broker, the order then gets routed to a MM who first sells the 10000 share to the market BEFORE having the actual shares. The long's broker makes the transfer of the shares to the MM. The reason that this appears as a short on the FINRA site is because the MM sells without owning them, exactly like a short sale. This is just a function of the settlement process
Illogical? If you watch the trading and how shares are downticked on the offer after size buys at a higher offer price, it clearly has the smell of a short trying to push stock down. I don't know of any liquidating long who would not wait to put shares out at a higher offer price after size offer is about to be taken out.
So, the possibility of a manipulative short pattern along with FINRA #'s wins the day for me....again IMHO
Monthly #'s don't reflect finra short #'s on most of these bb. You may say that proves your point, I say most MM's have exceptions rules and do not report accurate short totals.