Xoma was the first stock I bought as a new investor in 1990. I bought it at $16 p/s, and sold it at $20. Big bucks for a kid getting his feet wet as a trader. This also means I've followed and traded this company for nearly 25 years now, and I have taken advantage in the past two days to increase my position once again. I'm not fully allocated yet for this stock, and I will add more if the market forces us down another ten percent. Otherwise, I intend holding tight for the coming months unless obviously bad news develops.
I agree, facts2. The moves upward come in fits and starts, and we will have to wait until the selling pressure subsides for a new rise to begin. A few months out and we should see good reason for a return to the recent highs.
Apparently you missed the posts when the secondary was announced. In those posts, we discussed the reasons why the secondary was priced below the $14 dollar price (a parabolic rise in price for a few days after a favorable report). The secondary was priced fairly based on the price of the stock merely a day before the report sent traders jumping in and artificially raising the stock price. Even without the announcement of the secondary, the price would have fallen when the traders had seen the momentum slowing.
Again, your posts indicate you have short position. Good luck with it.
Today, CGEN was the only one of my holdings in the green. I'm not complaining.
I bought 500 shares at $6.10. I'll wait for a few more days until I decide whether or not to add again. If we hold above the 5.50 level, I'll add. If we drop below that (for reasons other than market turmoil), I'll sell.
A stock is up 100% in six months, and you call it a "total disaster." No "cheer leading" is necessary here. Time will tell whether or not the secondary was a wise move for the company and its shareholders. My opinion is that it was exactly the right move. Obviously, you have the opposite opinion. So good luck with that short position.
Great post. I'm glad you made the right trade the last time we went parabolic. I did not have the foresight to see the coming dilution and subsequent "time in the wilderness." However, I agree with your optimism about the stock action now, although the follow through will have to come after a significant announcement about sales, products, or coverage. Let's hope the rise next time is not so brief.
Oh yes, we are such snarky, mean-spirited people on this board, anyone with a contrary opinion is immediately reported to the local cosa nostra chapter to have his knees broken. Come on, sabba, admit when you have been wrong, and not the management. If we had dropped 50% since July, the last time you made your complaints against management, then you would have the right to keep making the same argument. The fact is, however, CGEN has increased in value by 100% since July, and despite the recent dilution of shares (made for a very clear and competent reason), the stock has so far stayed above the secondary price offering. Believe me, I have invested in many, many other biotech companies, where the stock price went far below the secondary offering within minutes of the announcement. Even Wall Street is beginning to notice the potential here, and the wise money managers know such an investment takes years to become a "ten bagger." I have the right to make this appeal to patience; I've been a holder since 2004. I see the difference in the company's potential now as opposed to ten years ago, and the difference in the active management who are working to make the investment community aware of that potential.
I've tried to argue reasonably with this poster in the past, but soon realized the time and effort were not worth it. He has not done his homework on the science of the company or the strategy the management is following. In addition, he wants a buyout or a merger, and I want to see the company thrive and flourish on its own.
Tomorrow will certainly be interesting. We should get a sense of how much the rise today was merely day-trader action because of the positive SA article on Friday, and how much was longer term investment action. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lower close tomorrow, but I will probably buy more shares on a significant drop if we do close lower. The real rise (or sell off) will occur with the next earnings report and conference call. The information we get then will provide more realistic reason to believe (or not).
I agree. Those secondary buyers were long, long term institutional buyers, and knew what they were getting into. Most of them probably had timelines of two to three years to see a profit, but when it came, it would be a big one. Let's hope we're on that track now.
Like you, I'm under water still, although I loaded up under three and that brought my cost basis down considerably. A few more days like this, and I'll have met the cost basis. I am definitely not intending to sell at that point, or even when I hit my purchases at the highs of three years ago.
I have shares in both a regular account and an Roth, so the shares I hold in the Roth will eventually be tax free. You can bet I will let them ride for as long as I can. This may very well be the nest egg I lost five years ago.
Yes, you said the magic words, "intellectual property." I thought that was the main reason for today's rise -- the street getting the message that this company has now improved its ability to eventually be profitable, or look more attractive for partnerships or a buyout.
I think it's a delayed reaction to yesterday's news. Everyone was holding fire pending the Russian problem. But, we'll find out tomorrow, eh?
My apologies for suggesting the original article at SA was "overstated" and appealed to the "greed-impulse of traders." The article was actually not a "pump" in the sense of misleading, but just strongly positive in tone. The facts were solid and well-researched. The headline, however, could have been less sensational in its promises of "Wealth Creation." But headlines today, in all media, presume to tell readers what they should think. "SeaWorld's bizarre PR" goes one headline as I write this. The PR may very well be "bizarre," but let readers decide for themselves without the prejudgment provided by the editorial staff.
Yes, that's the one that prompted my post. In the meantime, I missed the previous post by homeseto, which made mine redundant. He or she includes a very thorough covering of the topic.