great post.. thanks for your thoughts. This is the best explanation/analysis I've read so far. Makes sense.
It is so easy to twist things.. these posters can be ambiguous.. it sure would be nice for Gerald at some point to address this issue and bring some clarity to something so important.
Until then.. kudos for taking the time.
no problem (I don't mind the bluntness.. lol).. and I know most people have some kind of agenda.. however, it doesn't hurt to ask (and I have read these boards long enough to at least partially assess who might have some credibility).. your comment about the stock price is noted..
a good retort/explanation from somebody who can communicate to the layperson would probably save some retail person from selling shares unnecessarily.
Again, thanks for the response..
It would be very helpful for the non scientic types on this board to explain in detail why the data on that chart (on poster 3) can NOT be used as an accuracy result (for lympro)..
I thank you for starting this thread. I also initially understood the data was for confirming credibility.. however, this boggi guy has enough science background to twist the perception to the point it is very confusing to the lay person.
I would really appreaciate any further explanation why the data on that poster has nothing to do with what boggi is talking about. (that poster (#3) is kind of ambiguous and kind of sets up the small shareholder for confusion/manipulation without an explanation.)
I'm not asking for your opinion..
that chart does not seem to be statistically significant.. and you are telling me that even YOU did not bring this up yesterday?.. lol
Most investors did look at the chart and not one comment about this until your post..
instead of arguing with somebody who has called the company and its officer's "criminal" and you also said that you would be contacting the sec (yesterday) on another ambs issue..
I think I would prefer to hear a second opinion from somebody else...
i'm not bashing "you" I am bashing your behavior.. you'll never admit it (probably) but you overstep your authority as a mod on ihub.. and delete posts that don't agree with yours. At least it seems painfully obvious to me after monitoring that board for months.
You seem to have an agenda beyond just the truth. And that would be fine if you were just trading ambs.. but as a moderator you should really have a higher standard for yourself. jmo
I'm glad you posted this here.
I would suggest somebody text or email Gerald to get the answer from the horses mouth so to speak.
Please post Gerald's response here. (if anyone gets one)
This boggi character will make statements that sometimes need to be checked.
This is one of them.
I don't mind the debate.. but this boggi guy will make a negative post (on ihub) and then it seems he deletes many of the responses.. so his bashing goes unchecked..
I guess for the veterans putting him on ignore is okay.. but anybody "new" looking for info will get a real skewed analysis.
There is a post right now that he made (and he said he wouldn't post until the end of the month.. lol) that states that lympro is effectively in the low to mid 80's instead of 95.. and stil.. his bashes go unchecked - I'm guessing the people who are trying to respond are getting deleted (jmo)
been reading ihub for almost a year now.. and this boggi character is an admin over there..
(most people know this).. but people should know that he "soft bashes" when he owns shares and then "hard bashes" when he sells. For example, he talks about the potential long term success of manf when he owns shares and talks about the share price going to .25 but as soon as he sells he turns into just another hardcore basher. (and he is the one preaching about being one of the few who tells the truth.. lol)
I am probably stating the obvious for most folks.. but for those that are new..
this character will delete good posts (on ihub) and whenever he posts his bashing a guy named orion will magically appear to agree with him (because otherwise he would be talking to himself)..
anyway.. tough day for ambs in the last couple days.. but a great two weeks!.. looking forward to the end of the month. Cy
kind of a personal quesiton(s)..
however, it has been my observation following ambs boards.. we have a variety of investors both new to the markets and more sophisticated traders/investors.
we should all be aware that there are sharks in these waters..
btw.. ambs is the largest part of my speculative allocation.. I plan on putting some gains (some day) into my diversified health care fund.
yeah the adding people to the board.. uplisting.. ringing the bell..
and then this?
what a mess
It seems like the shorts had all the information beforehand..
somebody made a killing on this stock..
to look at it another way..
if it is positive btd news.. then this is an opportunity to get the PR just right..
and believe me.. not just one set of eyes would be checking and rechecking every word..
hopefully it is positive..
imo without a btd.. we still have great results.. but probably are in need of a partnership..
there was risk going into the fda process (on both sides).. if we get btd granted.. then big pharma risk the chance of paying a lot more..
if we don't get btd.. then we risk being behind the eight ball..
it would have been brilliant to have made a deal (win/win) where both sides hedge their risk..
If the pending "material" news was negative.. would management be obligated to share it right away?..
in other words.. if they got a btd "decline" email.. would they have been able to save this news for after hours?