You whine about "not one safe drug in 27 years" revealing all your IDs at once that have the same clueless mantra. They do have proven safe drugs - maybe not by your standards - but by FDA standards and regular medical standards.
Is your argument about the stock so very weak you must resort to childish name calling? You are another one I would absolutely LOVE to meet face to face - though cowards won't meet.
You know, perhaps you and I should meet face to face. People are much more polite when face to face.
I think this one is ripe for a buyout / takeover. It will be the buyout nobody saw coming. Though it isn't that hard to see that the high earnings growth rate of nearly 100% year over year would boost any acquirers balance sheet and improve their financial picture. At under $1B market cap, there are a lot of acquirers who can easily afford it.
Interesting that only 2 thumbs-up and 6 thumbs-down. There must be a lot of shorts on this board who don't want the company to succeed & move forward.
While true, it helps that this stock is currently undervalued.
At least the primary problem is now gone, though the problems run deeper than just the CEO. They need to clean house across the CxO ranks to make a fresh start - with the exception being the CMO/new-CEO. The others need to go.
The real litmus test will be to see if they can get the filing done with the FDA. That will go a long way to restoring investor confidence. If they can't get it done this round, all real investors will dump out. Only the foolish will be left holding the bag.
For now though, there is hope, as at least they recognize there are management problems and that is the first step towards fixing them. Now ... the FDA filing ...
Undoubtedly that some shareholders must know more than I do, like upcoming results and buyout related matters. My calculations are based on earnings and growth rate. I noticed you didn't challenge the facts, just all attitude.
Deservedly so, it went from #1 to COMPLETELY OFF the list of top momentum stocks at StockGarden.
So now we learn that they are on,y selling 4M of the 28M shares they own, and at a price of $14/share. Interesting timing to be sure, and a pretty strong undercut of current share price.
Thank you for your kind words. One more thing to consider, you triggered another thought on the funders of ISIS, etc., add to that the way they can collect on short term options (puts and calls both) and they can really clean up.
Irony, to make it worse, good faithful investors like you or I have to put up real money to sell a stock short. Not the Hedge Funds.
So, to answer your question, why it is legal at all, that has been debated and threatened to be removed, but in a nutshell, they allow it because it adds liquidity to the market. I still think they need to put up collateral like you and I do - and that would get rid of a LOT of the nonsense we deal with.
In the end, valuations and earnings growth win out. If the company continues to prosper, then year over year earnings growth will eventually cause SO many people to buy the stock the shorts will have no choice but to cover and cut their losses. That takes a long time though.
You're kidding right? Short selling is far more damaging than psychological. Short sellers do real and permanent damage to the PPS.
Think it through. If an average day has 1M shares trading at $70/share. On its own let's pretend there are an equal number of buyers and sellers and the share price doesn't move. In comes a short seller who sells 1M shares short. Suddenly all of those buyers get lower and lower prices, as the short seller takes $70 then $65 then $60 per share until the supply of buyers is exhausted.
The next round of buyers aren't trying to buy at $70 any more, now they are trying to buy at $60. NOW apply your psychological aspect, where potential buyers see the price drop 15% in a day and they stay away, not buying at all, so diminished buying pressure, making the short seller keep a lid on the price, selling fewer and fewer shares short to stop the price from rising. Momentum and technical traders and fund managers see the price isn't going anywhere so they decide not to buy, further reducing buying demand.
Average Joe Shareholder doesn't wait forever. He sees his investment rank 25% and his inclination is to save what he can and sells at the bottom, which is usually when the short covers.
Or worse, he bought in margin, share price goes down, and his broker FORCES him to sell at artificially low prices. Shortie can cover then at no risk.
Remember, Hedge Fund managers don't have to put up ANY collateral. They don't get margin calls. They can sell an UNLIMITED number of shares short, even shares that don't exist. The counter argument is, well, they have to cover someday. While that is true, they can wait YEARS to cover, and drive the price far lower and cover there.
Remember when Jon Kellyz shorted at $12 and covered at $48?
Sounds like the meeting was a resounding success. It appears the FDA-NIH are fully behind this.
Wait!! Don't forget about the guy who is afraid that bad news might hurt the PPS !!!!
Uh, isn't bad news always bad for the stock? If it was good for the stock it would be called good news.