Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

P L C SYSTEMS AŞ Message Board

participant42 73 posts  |  Last Activity: 18 hours ago Member since: Sep 16, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • participant42 participant42 18 hours ago Flag

    Thks, Grab. Back atcha.

  • Reply to

    I bought a few more share yesterday at 2.08

    by helpme_hanna Apr 28, 2016 10:52 AM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 28, 2016 11:22 AM Flag

    Hanna, I liked the slow down in volume yesterday. Wanted to see if we could get another day or two of diminishing short action, which could give us some real basing action. Then, good news would ease us up, the shorts having spent their powder--if if any really significant good news comes, then this time a short squeeze could drive this thing, since shorts no longer being tied to playing the previous financing round.

  • Reply to

    Normally, when a company is granted a patent...

    by orchids3333 Apr 21, 2016 2:18 PM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 22, 2016 10:00 AM Flag

    Orchids, darn it, "delisted" from the Nasdaq, not delisted as a stock. There are hundreds of viable companies that are otcqx or OTCQB. Nasdaq isn't the be all and end all; indeed it did nothing for RXI.

  • Reply to

    2.36 million shares trading

    by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 4:58 PM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 20, 2016 10:08 AM Flag

    And, on the other hand, who would sell in the immediate post-split days who didn't already dump pre-split--other than shorts. They still are everywhere.

  • Reply to

    2.36 million shares trading

    by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 4:58 PM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 20, 2016 9:47 AM Flag

    Yes, Grab. So many months ago, one of the theoretical deals Geert referenced was to have some company/investor agree to buy shares on the open market in return for something form RXI. Clearly, if there were to be such a deal, it wouldn't be announced until after the purchase. So, with the relative big volume of last days, can always wonder about such.

  • Reply to

    2.36 million shares trading

    by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 4:58 PM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 20, 2016 9:34 AM Flag

    "200,000" share equivalent in first two minutes this morning.

  • participant42 by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 4:58 PM Flag

    Was many, many months since we had 2.36 million shares trade in a day. Does today's equivalent 236k mean something? Shorts galore or a long stepping up and investing?

  • participant42 by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 12:31 PM Flag

    Yes, I do blame RXI management for effecting a reverse split, clearly oblivious to the consequences given the obvious mistreatment of RXI trading by the mechanized pros for all those post-Tang months. But, you can't blame them for the actual post-split price decay. The EASE of the decline from 2.60 to 2.30 in the last 2 days should be jawdropping given the longer pre-split battles at .30, .28, even .26. That EASE is not management's direct fault--they've issued 2 positive PRs in two days, their basic science so far uncompromising and uncontradicted. And, if there were no mechanized pros, the truths of sell on the ( negative) rumor and negative anticipation but buy on the actual news, would be prevailing here, and the reverse split anticipatory sell-off from low .30s to .26 should have been rebounded yesterday and today back to $3. or so. But, we know better, and knew better: the trump here is the mobilized shorts and the mechanized pros. And the terrible, corrupt EASE of post-reverse-split manipulative trading triumphs over all.

  • participant42 by participant42 Apr 19, 2016 9:55 AM Flag

    Even during the conference call it was clear that the assumption that a Nasdaq listing must be maintained at all costs was never questioned. Indeed, it was not understood what these "costs" might be. In the face of post-tang stock price manipulation that only a drop to .30 could slow down ( I see the further attenuation to .26 as due to the certitude of a post-split drop), the comany still had no education about what was being done to the shar price and the reason why. Even posters here just chided my earlier almost day-my-day notation how the share price and each trade was reflecting this non-fundamental shorting and algorithmic drowning of share price. And now the shorts have a rew playground starting with the comparatively "lofty" 2.60 at which to keep whack the stock at its knees.
    All of which is to underscore why I said the only solution was not a split, but a necessarily "bad deal" to find some other viable biotech to fold into even at a terrible ratio of existent stock numbers and value.
    Now, we have this continued disgusting process of price erosion even in the face of bits of good news and at a time where there is no reason for stock price to lack stability. There are plenty of stocks and companies that are stable and can grow as OTCQB and OTCQX.

  • Reply to

    Today's trading was not a good omen

    by helpme_hanna Apr 18, 2016 3:59 PM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 18, 2016 4:51 PM Flag

    Absent a deal, a reverse split enacted merely to avoid an otcqb listing is a stupid mistake. The Nasdaq listing post-Tang gave RXI less than nothing, and already today, for no fundamental reasons we dwell in new low territory--as predictable as a nightfall. And how easy it was to slip under .26 and .25-- no effort at all. Absent partnership/licensing/financing deal tommorow, we shall see $1.30 in but a few months. I voted no one the split, but naively hoped that with the only 1-10, RXI would have justifying news today or Tuesday.

  • participant42 by participant42 Apr 18, 2016 7:55 AM Flag

    Instead of entitling a PR "RXI to Present at X Conference....," with new data being buried in the second paragraph, there should have been a PR with the title, "New Data Show Potential of RXI's Self Delivery Compounds in quest for Corneal Wound Repair and Healing." The upcoming conference should have gotten the second paragraph. If that proposed headline overstates, then modifications could be made, but still should he the lead and the first paragraph. Indeed, even if the old headline had to be retained, the PR should have begun with "New Data showing potential........will be present at the X Conference on May 2....etc."

  • Reply to

    Timing

    by participant42 Apr 16, 2016 10:36 AM
    participant42 participant42 Apr 16, 2016 6:49 PM Flag

    I was also surprised, had expected 1-20, or "at worst" 1-30. So, pleased by the conservative 1-10, assuming the other shoe to fall Monday. However, if no Monday/Tuesday shoe, then doubt there's a path to follow.

  • participant42 by participant42 Apr 16, 2016 10:36 AM Flag

    Given managenent's touting of the virtues of a reverse split, they have already lined up a financing/partnership/licensing deal that was contingent on the split, rather than splitting and then hoping that would bring a good result. Hence, Monday morning should bring announcement of same. If not, the reverse split will be seen more as desperation, and, after a few days' bump, the shares will begin a retreat to $1.30, the 50% retreat typical of post RS small cap, money-losing companies.

  • Reply to

    Just a reminder

    by participant42 Mar 31, 2016 11:05 AM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 31, 2016 11:37 AM Flag

    Thanks so much for that important advice, Hanna.

  • participant42 by participant42 Mar 31, 2016 11:05 AM Flag

    You see this stock still trading in the hundredths of a cent, you know it's still in the hands of, a pawn of, the algorithmic, high-frequency boys, with no resemblance of what a hands-off, post-CC trading day might look like. That's one aspect of the proposed reverse split that is so frightening for any longs: what a prey a $5 Rxii stock will be. They'll cut it off at the knees starting day 6 post-split.

  • Reply to

    Sabaidii2 the Hypocrite!!

    by sabaidii2 Mar 30, 2016 1:38 PM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 30, 2016 2:23 PM Flag

    Well, I AM surprised, Sab, that you're buying shares, as I think there is only one bit of news at the CC, heading into a reverse split, that could move the price up at this point: no, it's not good clinical results-- since we'd still be doing a reverse split followed by more dilutive financings. Rather, the only news preventing further price decline would be an announcement that the RS was cancelled and that either RXII will be folded into another company or that a deal had been reached-- licensing or other-- that would unquestionably thrust the share price ver $1. Absent either of those unlikely events, pps will be heading downward into the horizon.

  • Reply to

    Finally voted--NO

    by participant42 Mar 27, 2016 9:37 PM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 29, 2016 11:00 AM Flag

    Hanna, you can no longer even see the obvious.

  • Reply to

    Finally voted--NO

    by participant42 Mar 27, 2016 9:37 PM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 29, 2016 9:52 AM Flag

    A reverse plot is a sure ticket to oblivion for shareholders. A NO vote forces management to reconsider their shortsighted---or no-sighted---decision, making them cast around for the least damaging alternative.

  • Reply to

    Finally voted--NO

    by participant42 Mar 27, 2016 9:37 PM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 28, 2016 1:31 PM Flag

    Hanna, they had a year to lobby said companies about their Nasdaq rules and how deleterious it will be for stock price to do another reverse split-- a split necessitated by the stupid, archaic " need" to be Nasdaq rather than OTCQB. You think the capital investors are happy with the stock slide already associated with the coming RS? As for QB your "if we went there, we would never be able to get out" is old thinking, too. Who would care about "getting out."? The company will or will not grow; being on Naddaq for a few years has done exactly what? As for dear Geert, I know he's as disappointed as any about the dearth of a deal over the last year; if he's asked at the CC whether it would have been reasonable to deduce from his comments months ago at the time of the .40 financing that he expected a deal to get us at least to $1 by today, if he says no, he would not be telling the truth.

  • Reply to

    Finally voted--NO

    by participant42 Mar 27, 2016 9:37 PM
    participant42 participant42 Mar 28, 2016 10:00 AM Flag

    Whoops, meant to finish the initial point ":Bio, then RXI should begin to lobby Broadfin and others to reverse their archaic rules not to invest in ANY OTC companies," given the advent of OTCQB, etc..........