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

OneBeacon Insurance Group, Ltd. Message Board

snogreen 517 posts  |  Last Activity: May 24, 2015 9:28 AM Member since: Aug 30, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Thursday'May 28th Presentation

    by sdhoolteach2000 May 22, 2015 1:21 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 24, 2015 9:28 AM Flag

    I wouldn't get too excited about Finkel presenting. We've been down this road before, many times. For many years, when RGRX traded over $1 per share, Finkel went to many conferences. Nothing ever happened. I don't blame him for trying. But nothing will happen from the two conferences he presents at, IMO. Thesse two types are conferences...get paid by companies to come. they just don't attract serious bio investors. And usually dozens of companies promote their story. It woudl be a different story if RGRX is invited to a respected sell side firm with a biotech clientele. BUt RGRX does not meet their vetting standards., yet. It all comes back to the same thing....a WIN ON A TRIAL. We need a trial win to make people look again at TB 4. Basically, TB 4 is black ballled becaiuse of 20 years of hype and mishaps by Finkel. the TB 4 story was flogged too much, and nothing to show for it, except close to BK at 4 cents a year ago.. We need china trial to start. we need a win there. if that happens, larger bio investors may look closer, because two USA trial will start soon after. These two conferences will do little. CHINA is what will get investors on board, if it wins. It's been ONE year simce premlinary China okay. HOW LONG till final "all clear to start'?

  • On the chance we are up today, more than a usual PR release, it coudl be teh warrants. I wondered here if someone wanted size and don't mind paying 56 cents, best way to to buy warrants near expirations. I added up and in about 5 days before expiration almpost 1 million traded. Most of it between 0.002 and 0.005. A MM assumes no one will exercise, out of money. But with easily 800,00 traded it is possible it was a LONG bidder at 0.002 and 0.005 who woudl exercise. So the MM may have sold into that bid thinking no way woudl they exercise, so free money. So RGRX also waited and held back todays news. I DO NOT NO hype by me...but if RGRX is up a lot stronger on larger volume, then it may point that a MM shorted the warrants on expiration and that now leaves them SHORT hundreds of thousands if they were exercised at 56 cents.which means MM has to BUY. Just have to wait and see. If the volume is NOT so big, then a safe bet the warrants were not exercised. If volume IS big, they were and MM is shortt! I just don't know.

  • Well, pretty obvious RGRX had this news and they held it back until the warrants expired. Guess they did not want the dilution. which is okay. But also obvious the last few days that G Tree in Korea was up big. So obviously the news here today was given in Korea a few days ago.

    Warrnats out of way to affect trading. Nice that this article was "peer reviewed".which is a bonus. peer review is best if possible.

  • Reply to

    Need Buyers

    by trotupinfront May 21, 2015 11:30 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 21, 2015 2:19 PM Flag

    We need the China trial to start's been almost one year since preliminary approval fro it in JUNE 2014.....we need to get this warrant stuff done......we need the PR firm that RGRX is giving $30,000 to......along with a free 30,000 shares for get their report out...get these few things done and moving...... and buyers will reappear.

  • snogreen snogreen May 21, 2015 12:59 PM Flag

    It doesn't seem that B-Ball has much in Iowa. I B-Ball manages not to get hit too hard by HRL seemed to..B-BAll will have a great few quarters ahead...if they have supply........turkey prices up, corn prices down. This also goes back to SEB....they'll have a decent Q on their 50% stake in B-BAll.......but hogs are up 23 cents and corn is down almost 30 cents.....since early Q1.

    SEB is cheap. Bresky controls 910,000 shares. There are only 260,000 outstanding he does not own, yet. SEB has now $645 million in cash and short term investments, and NO long term debt. if Bresky is not buying back stock at these levels.knowing that Q1 was kind of an aberration...then he has a screw loose. Smithfield and Hillshire sold out at around 16 times EBIDTA........Bresky can buy SEB shares at about 7-8 times EBIDTA...and will not have to borrow money to do it! USE Shareholders money to slowly take SEB private - for the benefoty of the Bresky family!

  • snogreen snogreen May 21, 2015 11:41 AM Flag

    Where is "Calhoun County"??? Sounds like Georgia? I bet GA. But I don't think Butterball is that active in GA. Butterball HQ is in Garner, NC. To give an idea of where their processing plants are.which I then woudl expect to be kind of close to teh contract is list:

    Huntsville, AR
    Ozark, AR
    Carthage, MO
    Mt. Olive, NC
    Jonesboror, AR
    Montgomery, IL

    I don't See B-BAll much in MN.....where a bit hit was to HRL.

    Looks like B-Ball fairly big in AR.three plants.

  • Reply to

    Green Tree up again

    by fflasv May 20, 2015 10:56 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 21, 2015 6:23 AM Flag

    If RGRX is TB 4 and basically at $150 million G Tree is TB 4.......G Tree not as good a deal as RGRX. But what I'd like to know is... what caused the G Tree surge over last handful of days. News? rumor? report? A sophisticated Korean institutional investor looking at G tee would certainly check out info on RGR and TB 4.... so they would see the huge valuation difference. But if it is retail in Korea buying G Tree.....what is causing the "pile in". RGRX hired a PR firm over a month ago. MAybe G Gtree did too over there. I think they (RGRX) have some kind of campaign and report, by now, ready to go. But I think they are waiting to do it for Lee's China trial to sign first patient......or they want to wait until the warrants go away, which is today. Maybe RGRX did not want the over 4 million shares dilution, so they don't wish it over 56 cents until after May 21. Who knows.

  • snogreen snogreen May 20, 2015 2:54 PM Flag

    Buyback program has always been in place. Right now there is $50.8 million authorized. SEB tried to do a big buback last Spring via a Dutch Tender offer. It wasn't that successful..they got about 16,000 shares total...but at the great price of 2,950. SBE did not buy back any shares in Q1 2015.....but SEB was over $4,000 a lot of it. Then a seller and the shorts collpased SEB to a print of $3,225. It was silly. You can go to Note #11 of the 10-K filed a few months ago for 2014. But here is teh relevant quote:

    "Seaboard has a share repurchase program in place which was initially approved by its Board of Directors in November 2009, and is in effect through October 31, 2015. In May 2014, the Board of Directors increased the dollar amount of Seaboard common stock authorized to be repurchased under the share repurchase program by $20,000,000, and Seaboard commenced a tender offer to repurchase shares. On June 19, 2014, Seaboard completed the tender offer, pursuant to which it repurchased 16,738 shares of common stock at a price per share of $2,950, for a total cost of $49,377,000. As of December 31, 2014, $50,846,000 remained available for repurchases under this program."

  • snogreen snogreen May 20, 2015 1:15 PM Flag

    I think Butterball has some farms affected, but noit as bad as Hormel. Butterball being teh largest, is spread out. But SEB benefits THREE ways...first, if Butterbal lisn't hit as bad as HRL and has decent supply......turkey prices have risen, which benefits Butterball as largest supplier. Second, Corn prices has dropped a LOT since the flu....since 30 million dead chickens and dead turley do not need corn feed...and there was an over supply already. So Butterbal is seeing HIGHEr turkety prices and LOWER feed costs! It doesn't get any better. THIRD.......with corn prices down almost 30 cents....SEB Pork division is also a huge beneficiary..feed costs dropped. Also? SEB's bad Q1 in pork was with hogs trading around low 60 cents most of that Q1...but hog prices have rebounded to over 80 cents for June.....hog prices UP over 20 cents (255 to 30%)..corn prices DOWN almost 30 cents...........and OIL prices are low which benefits trasnportation and fuel and GREALY affects the profit of SEB Marine. I hope and pray SEB is buying back stock as much as they can down here.

    SEB is cheap.

  • Reply to


    by thebasiles777 May 19, 2015 9:54 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 19, 2015 11:44 AM Flag

    First, get teh warrant play gone. Then no#1 issue is getting the CHINA trial going. It's ben 11 months since China gave preliminary, but not final okay. RGRX has hired a PR firm for a 6 month gig.. My guess is that take a while to write up their report to distribute...but they are timing when to start. My guess is they wait till teh day that CHINA says all clear tio start. because when that happens the clock starts to tick on trial release news...and investprs can make a play. But right now all is in Chinese limbo with I asume is red tape.

  • Reply to


    by borialisnorialis May 18, 2015 11:53 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 18, 2015 2:36 PM Flag

    I don't believe that RGRX has any drug titled "RGN-359". If they don't have one, they can't partner it. So no news. There is 259 for eyes, but that is basically already partnered, so that new is out.

    Nice try.

  • Reply to

    Here are RGRX own words - evasive!

    by snogreen May 17, 2015 6:40 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 17, 2015 9:19 PM Flag

    Whaaaaa? everything you just said is this, quote, 'I think it will go down like this"......if YOu and RGRX is so sure, so confident, so cocky...that you know for a contractual, legal, signed on paper FACT....that the split will NEVER EVER BE LESS than a 60-40.....then why the F is RGRX so afraid, scared, panicked and obtuse TO REFUSE TO SHOW THE FIGURES? God, you are silly (no naive) sometimes. Trust no one, especially Finkel Tinkel. Bull1863 is completely correct, he was an SEC LAWYER for God's sake! You wanna see a #$%$ mess? Try this......RGRX is paying some PR outfit $5,000 month, to soon HYPE RGRX all ovcer teh internet..... How will it look when the new folks go direct to Yahoo messahge board and they see an ex SEC lawyer and others TRASHINg how mgmt screws up and hides things? And the SEC may soon be involved? Believe me, bull1863 is not to be trifled with. RGRX is wrong....and yet all you do is "hope" and say... "I think we have a 60-40 split". WHAT IS RGRX AFRAID OF... IF THE WORST IS A 60-40SPLIIT? HUHHH? DISCLOSE IT LEGALLY!!!! Simple answer, because RGRX is hidikg the fact that it is NOT... down the road a 60-40 split at all...., but far less for RGRX. WAKE UP. Finkel Tinekel id hiding, yet again...same old sorry..for what.....20 YEARS NOW????

  • Reply to

    bull1863 is right on this

    by snogreen May 16, 2015 5:01 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 17, 2015 1:37 PM Flag

    well to agree to disagree, again. RGRX did not work to "save" retail investors from BK. they worked to save themselves. In a BK situation where TB 4 assets are auctioned off, they woudl have fetched VERY little...because of 20 years of delay, flopped trials and bad design. It was only about 6 MONTHS ago that RGRX's WHOLE MARKET CAP was about $11 million. And that wasn't in a BK situation. So you try to hoist what an approved drug DNDN got in a bankupt auction? RGRX has pretty good patents and eye area alone is a billion $ market. So why is RGRX only at a $50 million market cap? With all these great trials? Simple, no one believes. Had RGRX gone BK, they woudl have ben LUCKY to get a handful of million for TB 4 assets. Basically no one is paying that now for RGRX.

  • Reply to


    by borialisnorialis May 17, 2015 1:45 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 17, 2015 1:31 PM Flag

    Depak Srivastava is not a Board member at all! We know who he is and what reserach he has done. We like it.. But all he is, is a doc...that also does heart research. he is on a scientific advisory board of RGRX..which means very little really. RGRX puts it up mostly for show. I highly doubt that there are quarterly meetings of the advisory science board folks...and I bet thaty have no input intop almost all other things RGRX...

  • Reply to

    bull1863 is right on this

    by snogreen May 16, 2015 5:01 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 17, 2015 8:58 AM Flag

    Disagree. YEs, RGRX was close to BK. Yes they pulled off a creative deal, which surprised me. But you talk up how great mgmt is because they could have let it go BK and screwed us retail??? Think. Had RGRX gone BK, ALL THEIR stock, warrants and options would be worth ZERO. They lose all $$. next step is in bankruptcy is your assts are AUCTIONED OFF to the highest bidder. Since every trial over 20 years was messed up by mgmt, poorly designed, badly executed (EB) or just plain bad luck in choosing endpoints (Ora dry eye trial).....then the assets auctioned woudl get little or no money. Further, on an auction of BK assets NO company would want to bring the totally underperforming Finkel on board with them, wiith a cushy set up. Goldstein they may need. But Finkel is GONE. On an court ordered auction of RGRX TB 4 assets, there is NO control who woudl take them, or how much they woulfd pay. So Finkel and Goldstein had no choice but to protect their LARGE equity holding by doing whatever it takes to keep RGRX out of BK. Greed. On BK they lose ALL, and Finkel certainly his job, equity and security. RGRX cared a whit about retail investlrs and bankruptcy. they cared about themselves only and retail... are along for the ride. But the G tree deal was good. Kudos. But RGRX is HIDING just how much of the JV we really own, in the longer run. Not right.

  • Reply to

    Here are RGRX own words - evasive!

    by snogreen May 17, 2015 6:40 AM
    snogreen snogreen May 17, 2015 6:51 AM Flag

    Okay Bo and B7.......Finkel Tinkel supporters.....MODEL THIS and EXPLAIN THIS....RGRX stake in the JV starts to GO DOWN, the second G Tree just files for a trial. Then if the trial wins.......RGRX says it vaguely..... RGRX % stake can go down further. THEN? RGRX states that if G Tree puts more money into the JV...RGRX can can AGAIN be reduced.. So neither of you...Bo or B7......have anty real clue just what RGRX will OWN in the critcal joint venture - if all things go well and TB 4 approved to sell.. ALL RGRX's stake does is go down, and down and down.... at each step of the way. WHERE DOES IT END? WHERE DOES IT STOP? How on earth do you think you will ever get a respected biotech analyst(s) to write up RGRX....when the analyst is refused the most basic info of what RGRX even the JV stake........or how FAST RGRX's stake in the JV - can be reduced into G Tree's favor!! Don't get me wrong....I have been surprised at every step how well, and creative, G Tree has been. Job well done!. but there is always a "rub"..always a "back end".....and RGRX, in typical not telling shareholders..WHAT THEY REALLY OWN! Bull1863 is 100% correct. Ownership stakes are mandated by SEC to be disclosed. Royalties do not... and sometimes even other finnancial consideration can be confidential. But OWNERSHIP has to be spelled out. LAck of transparency gives opportunity for cheats and insde deals. That is why SEC wants all fairly disclosed. RGRX hides.

  • For all you silly people who swallow whatever finkel Tinkel says and does as "Trust me". he hides stuff all the time.

    Bull1863 is 100% RIGHT! RGRX is not allowed to hide what their true, long term ownership is for the JV ReGenTree. As of NOW? RGRX owns 49% and G Tree 51%.....but those figures CHANGE....if things go well and TB 4 get's approved and starts selling $$$$$. There is the rub. Royalty percent figure regularly wre not disclosed, due to confidential and competitive things between companies..but they do give you a rough idea. In RGRX case, it is a high single digits% or just over into low double digit%. fine. We know that. BUT WE DO NOT KNOW what RGRX wil ultimately OWN % in the JV......and that affetcs just how much someone can "model" what RGRX itself is worth if TB 4 get's approved....because RGRX hides what happens in the JV. See for yourself. QIOTE form 10-Q:

    "G-treeBNT is solely responsible for funding all the product development and commercialization efforts of the Joint Venture. G-treeBNT made an initial contribution of $3 million in cash and received an initial equity stake of 51%. G-treeBNT’s equity stake may increase upon the Joint Venture achieving certain product development milestones (including receipt of a new drug application by the U.S. FDA) and the additional funding by G-treeBNT...... and (RGRX) received an initial equity stake in the Joint Venture of 49% which may be diluted as G-treeBNT’s ownership increases. ......."G-treeBNT’s equity stake may increase upon the Joint Venture achieving certain product development milestones (including receipt of a new drug application (NDA) by the U.S. FDA) and the additional funding by G-treeBNT."

    SEE? RGRX tells us OUTR STAKE CAN BE REDUCED.but never by "how much". The last quote is astounding. G Tree's stake in teh JV goes UP, just when the file the drug trial application with the FDA! SEE THAT? RGRX get's DILUTED long beroie a trial even STARTS! So what is the DEAL

  • Reply to

    bull1863 is right on this

    by snogreen May 16, 2015 5:01 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 16, 2015 9:50 PM Flag

    JJ and RGRX hasn't said #$%$. All you have from them is a vague statement that RGRX now will have a 49% stake in the ReGenTree joint venture. But CLEARLY after that RGRX stated that that interest can diminish. but RGRX neither states how, when or why that percentage interest can diminish. So in essence, you have no concrete idea of WHAT RGRX owns in the ReGenTree joint venture -.over the longer haul.DO YOU? SHOW ME ANYWHERE IN THE SEC FILINGS where it is all spelled out - in 100% clear, legalese, boilerplate...signed on the dotted line......contractual, un-moveable LANGUAGE/ YOU DO NOT HAVE THAT, DO YOU? Answer is no you don't. All you have is vagarities that RGRX owns 49% NOW, but the may NOT OWN 49% after at some point. So why is RGRX afraid to SPELL OUT THE LEGAL DEAL? Hmm??? WHAT DO WE OWN in the JV long term? 49% - or not 49%...what can cause our ownership to CHANGE from 49% to something else lower. CAN YOU TRELL ME? no you can't..becaue RGRX is not disclosing it.

    You all should get on hands and kness that bull1863.... as not just a lawyer, but an SEC ex employee lawyer, is watching OUT FOR YOUR BUTTS. Finklel Tinkel has hidden TONS of stuff from us over the years.....much of which I found later, and THEN he discloses?? Just like I did with the Korean burn abstract recently . Hidden - until I posted it before him.

  • I would suggest that all of you pay attention to bull1863.. He disclosed it, not me. He is a lawyer. he stil is. He worked at the SEC for many years. he knows personally where 2-4% of RGRX shares are, and that is after all the dilution last few years. What Bull aks is RIGHT! There is no disclosure by RGRX of what RGRX owns in the JV. All it states is that we get a milestone now and when the trial starts. If successful, RGRX get's royalty high single digits or just into double digits. RGRX puts up no money for trial. but HERE IS THE RUB. RGRX initially get's a 49% stake in the JV. BUt RGRX said that % stake can be LESS over time..depending. THAT is the crux. RGRX is not spelling out exactly what we own!! Try this. Say TB 4 works and becomes a $1 billion drug in eyes eventually. RGRX owns 49% of eheJV and gets low % royalty as well. But RGRX 49% can BE DECREASED in favor of G Tree. What id the JV deal says something like.....after the royalty payments reach $100 million to RGRX, RGRX's 49% stake automatically is reduced to a 10% stake. SEE WHAT I SAY? NO ONE KNOWS WHAT RGRX stake is! It is 49% now, but why is RGRX hiding the figures of how that stake vcan be reduced to G Tree favor? IT CAN BE REDUCED. WE DO NOT KNOW! So how can you MODEL what RGRX owns or will get $$$, if TB 4 ever approved in eyes. RGRX can keep royalty % a confidential, but they can't hide OWNERSHIP stakes. That is all bull wants...clarification of what RGRX owns in JV and HOW OR IF THAT STAKE GOES DOWN!

  • Reply to

    Ha, "reported" short interest skyrockets

    by snogreen May 16, 2015 2:43 PM
    snogreen snogreen May 16, 2015 4:48 PM Flag

    I know, bo........I was responding to geez.not you. I am fully aware that a cash account prevents lending shares. buit hopw many peopel REALLy have cash accounts? Most all have margin ones.even if you don't use margin, brokers want that acount so they lend shares. You still are spitting in teh ocean to do a swicth to cash account. 101 million shares.....and geez is worried about37,00 being borrowed?

14.83-0.12(-0.80%)May 26 4:02 PMEDT