I think it's still too early to tell, but your comments on the short side feel just as over the top as the long side comments.
And I'm saying no hype because honestly, I'm not really sure who knows about them. Some do, but not many.
I disagree. Hype - no. Too early to tell - yes. Is it possible that nothing comes of this? Sure, but again, I say too early to tell. I DO think they need to see some positive results this year though from their partners.
I don't disagree with you on the technology validation piece, but the validation of the stock (what we are interested in) is going to occur when partners producing revenue and earnings from commercialization. I view XON like roulette. With each deal, they are covering more numbers on the board, but the first ball is going to be spinning for some time before it finally falls. Lots of drugs in development with partners, but from what I've seen, furthest advanced is in Ph II although still looking.
- with some of the equity positions they have, they are betting on the company too, not just what they are developing with the technology.
- building a nice portfolio
- some pretty smart investors who have likely forgotten more about the stock market than I will ever know are here
- cash burn
- from what I'm reading, they are a big source of funding for a few companies by buying shares (if I read the 10Q right, they own 50+% of AquaBounty), and ones I've read about are early stage and will need more money. In order to maintain ownership %'s, they're going to need to feed these guys more money (likely in the form of buying shares) to maintain their ownership %. That's going to cost money short-term and will contribute to their own cash-burn rate.
Potentially Positive unknown:
- again, they have so many irons in the fire with the ECC's and a transforming ECC agreement could be right around the corner. We just don't know.
Agreed, but just to clarify, shareholders get $1.08 worth of shares, not 1.08 shares. Problem is, MEDS is not trading in enough volume.
Absolutely, I think you should buy two stocks that are caught in the middle of a price war that's going to eat up profits. If I were you, I'd buy both in large volumes. Brilliant idea.
I'm not going to make Kellogg a saint, but frankly, we'd be in no better position with Smith and his black box. Yes, the argument can easily be made that we have no idea what Kellogg wants. Fine... Smith isn't exactly forthcoming with what he wants either and the way he holds his cards, he was in a position to pull something nefarious as well. I'm not sure what you see that makes Kellogg with at least some power to oversee such a miserable option as opposed to the prior situation.
I am truly mixed on this. Is he secretive? Yeah, I think Smith holds his cards close to the chest and too close for shareholders who want to have some idea as to where he is going. Speaking of which, we don't know where he is going and some days, it feels like he is making this up as he goes. During the earnings calls, I think he writes down a few things that he wants to discuss and then mostly speaks off the top of his head and talks like Bill Belichick (ie, tells you nothing or very little - some larger picture or philosophical but not much for details). And I guess the lack of details does lead shareholders to question ethics. And no, I do not see expertise in the current structure to do some of the things MFC wants to do.
That said, I don't think the share price would be suffering the way that it is now if commodity prices weren't in the trash can... matter of fact, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. He also seems to be willing to go 50 miles beyond the ends of the earth if he thinks there's a deal to be had on an asset.
One person's meanderings... I think I'm voting with Kellogg.