Message boards get more than a fair share of dumbtards.
In addition to the above...either cloudy_day_jane is far from a thorough reader of this message board, preferring to dabble in messages of the liar ibmwatcher or ...cloudy_day_jane is unwilling to discuss the fact that ibmwatcher's alias list with the ibmwatcher claim that all on the list is for the use of 1 poster (a lie) with cloudy_day_jane on the list as well as my screen name...ibmwatcher with the falsehood then that ...cloudy_day_jane and I are the same person...AND ...cloudy_day_jane DOES NOT PROTEST that ibmwatcher is untruthful. How lazy is that? In my book it's much, much too lazy.
I have failed in the past and will again in the future. Nothing like you ever have, however. When in October of last year, QTWW was just above $4, you were calling it to $2. Had anyone acted upon that call, had gone short then, they would have suffered watching this trade over $11. Worse for anyone who shorted at 4 and change and covering over $10...losing more than 200%. But you'd rather fill the board with nonsense using the accusation that I am ibmwatcher. It's no wonder you have the reputation you do at this message board. Where's your short cohort, scamfraud (11/13/2013 scamfraud was posting like a rabid short, quite humorous IMO). As for what I had said last October...I'll get to that.
cloudy_day_jane...on 10/28/2013 4:01 pm you posted the subject heading
karnut2000 bashing CGEN
My message here to you 10/17 8:13 pm "yes my strong buy rating Aug 25 was obvious to anyone who read it." which was in the thread/subject heading 08/25/13 that I started...the message was, oh and cloudy_day_jane best of luck bashing QTWW with my Strong Buy rating. Since 8/25 was a Sunday the Friday close of 8/23 $2.07 and CGEN close 10/28/2013 about 8 or 9% lower now than it was then. You can defend ibmwatcher all you want...that poster is a liar. QTWW is a buy, short stuff.
in the area of comprehension surrounding ibmwatcher and the years of lies posted by that person. That's ok. I have no reason to value your opinion anyway.
Obama's indifference to Lois Lerner taking the fifth...how is that acceptable to voters?
I find it offensive that ibmwatcher posts that I use your alias. Perhaps...cloudy_day_jane you are indifferent of ibmwatcher's claim. Or even less logical, you see ibmwatcher as a truth teller.
Hardly. In the most simple of terms, yes...ibmwatcher is being childish. But ibmwatcher is a liar. That list, one that has varied over the years, is not a list of aliases that one person uses. ibmwatcher has been posting lists, changing the list of aliases. To that objective ibmwatcher has never once been right about all being used by me...my alias listed. Some time back I told ibmwatcher to put money where his contention is and I'll have Yahoo verify that all those names are not mine. Making ibmwatcher liable in a wager, making the untruth known and verified as untrue by Yahoo...and ibmwatcher declined.
So much more complicated than what a child would undertake. It's years of lies by ibmwatcher. Someone on that list posted something about ibmwatcher or some other stock tip,,,whatever. The whatever being ibmwatcher was so injured by that, it turned ibmwatcher into a pathologic and chronic liar. A couple or few years ago...ibmwatcher offered up an "olive branch" that term meant that the list making would stop. Of course I never, never expected that to be anything more than another ibmwatcher lie.
I said the same to a family member today Re: the 200 day. Stay long...stay strong. Enjoy the weekend.
jmacinvestments people like fevotersbutt are either stupid or seeking to annoy. They can be found just about anywhere...for example, at Sirius the rabid basher rogerdodgerintexas when SIRI was below 50 cents. cloudy_day_jane or ibmwatcher at QTWW. No one can legitimately deny that these types exist.
AND NOW AN UPTICK
What applies to you in my message is completely relevant...ibmwatcher's flawed list that the said poster hopes people view as truthful and the outright implication that you and I are the same person, you've chosen to ignore. You can't appear much more stupid by doing that. That's fine by me. Display your stupidity more!
It's not about whining, you fool. It's about lies versus truth, loser.
More the liar than a coward, in deed. There is more than one flaw to ibmwatcher's repeating claim (the one mentioned...all one poster) regarding the list (which changes through the years). The liar, ibmwatcher, a pathological liar, knows the truth. Ibmwatcher knows the list is a lie. Make some excuse why you,ibmwatcher. refuse to accept the terms. 100 grand goes to the person telling the truth, which would be me. You, the loser, would be compensating Yahoo for the time and expense they devote to proving you wrong on top of my $100,000.00...got it? Squirm for me some more...try not to leave a slime trail. Here is the reply ibmwatcher offered..."Grow up fool!!!" However the challenge has little to do with maturity. It's all about lies (years of ibmwatcher lies) and those lies not being validated as truth (which of course is impossible). He or she is more of a liar than a coward. Even a coward has the wherewithal not to enter into a situation where the liar knows it will cost him or her money. I find it all pathetically COMICAL...cloudy_day_jane doesn't object to being on the list...the implication that I and cloudy_day_jane are the same poster (according to ibmwatcher) but cloudy_day_jane does not contest. Perhaps the liar and the board idiot share the same intellect. LOL !!!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
I've challenged you before, you coward and liar. I'm willing to meet you at Yahoo HQ, with their oversight and liar pays Yahoo and truth-teller compensation. How's $100,000 sound? Not all one poster and that, you pathological liar, is the truth. Make some excuse why you refuse to accept the terms. The 100 grand goes to the person telling the truth, which would be me. You, the loser, would be compensating Yahoo for the time and expense they devote to proving you wrong on top of my $100,000.00...got it? Squirm for me now...try not to leave a slime trail.
Those long are aware that a FDA Ok or denial is due very soon. I have read too many messages that I would consider as being anything but informative. I went through some SEC filings to find the compliance date. Current shareholders have the decision to make. Hold for news that the FDA trials are Ok'd or sell. More than 3 months remaining, I am very confident the FDA will decide prior to the $1 compliance date.
Nasdaq gives somewhat a mixed review as to institutional holders. Overall it appears there was definite net selling; fund managers exiting. Dated data, as such, is...well, dated. With the new directors, their background, it may be that Goldman, the largest holder according to Nasdaq, added shares (again dated data). Yet, I have to think that this bounce off a 10 year low indicates one, possibly both of the following. The new directors are forcing shorts to cover and/or the funds that had previously ran for the exit door are buying. Everyone is free to agree or disagree. I will choose to refrain from posting until the FDA makes a decision.
No offense taken...one needs to be much more offensive over quite a duration for me to become offended. It's rather typical IMO that offensive types exist more prevalently in the cyber world than real life. But "rather bearish" is outright inaccurate. For you to be correct in characterizing my POV...
I am less bullish than you. Regarding the comment you made, potential alone won't get you anywhere near your more bullish price target. For that matter, same should be said for mine. Results matter, and there's no debating that. Time will determine the outcome.