|
|
Post by JHam on Sept 22, 2015 21:43:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Sept 22, 2015 21:53:20 GMT
Damn that's no good... Tony Fiorino gave them some much needed credibility. I sure hope he does stick around in an "executive scientific role" as the PR says. |
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Sept 22, 2015 22:09:27 GMT
Damn that's no good... Tony Fiorino gave them some much needed credibility. I sure hope he does stick around in an "executive scientific role" as the PR says. Agreed. Not good. I think Natanson (sp?) was also given a similar role when he was let go. Doubt Fiorino hangs around. |
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Sept 23, 2015 19:43:07 GMT
Damn that's no good... Tony Fiorino gave them some much needed credibility. I sure hope he does stick around in an "executive scientific role" as the PR says. Agreed. Not good. I think Natanson (sp?) was also given a similar role when he was let go. Doubt Fiorino hangs around. And the ship goes down with the captain.... Why the heck don't I think to short companies at times like this? |
|
|
|
Post by dayanand33 on Sept 24, 2015 16:35:51 GMT
Agreed. Not good. I think Natanson (sp?) was also given a similar role when he was let go. Doubt Fiorino hangs around. And the ship goes down with the captain.... Why the heck don't I think to short companies at times like this? CEO departure doesn't necessarily question the validity of science. Shorting it now could be risky because the stock may bounce back. I would rather wait it to be in the $2.50 range and buy some. |
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Sept 24, 2015 17:29:05 GMT
And the ship goes down with the captain.... Why the heck don't I think to short companies at times like this? CEO departure doesn't necessarily question the validity of science. Shorting it now could be risky because the stock may bounce back. I would rather wait it to be in the $2.50 range and buy some. You should know (from OCAT), that the science by itself isn't enough. I wasn't questioning the validity of the science. Fiorino's arrival gave me great hope after hearing what a mess Lebovits is. I'll agree that there's a chance it could bounce (based on some data being released or something), but I'd also assign a much lower probability to this than the stock tanking based on Fiorino's departure. And now Lebovits is back in control.... not good. |
|
|
|
Post by dayanand33 on Sept 24, 2015 19:06:12 GMT
CEO departure doesn't necessarily question the validity of science. Shorting it now could be risky because the stock may bounce back. I would rather wait it to be in the $2.50 range and buy some. You should know (from OCAT), that the science by itself isn't enough. I wasn't questioning the validity of the science. Fiorino's arrival gave me great hope after hearing what a mess Lebovits is. I'll agree that there's a chance it could bounce (based on some data being released or something), but I'd also assign a much lower probability to this than the stock tanking based on Fiorino's departure. And now Lebovits is back in control.... not good. Agreed that science is not enough. I think it is safer to short a stock when there is a impending dilution and the data read outs are further away in the time line. If the company isn't short of funds and there are pending near term data announcements, it is likely that the stock would bounce back quickly and squeeze the shorts. |
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Sept 24, 2015 19:50:29 GMT
You should know (from OCAT), that the science by itself isn't enough. I wasn't questioning the validity of the science. Fiorino's arrival gave me great hope after hearing what a mess Lebovits is. I'll agree that there's a chance it could bounce (based on some data being released or something), but I'd also assign a much lower probability to this than the stock tanking based on Fiorino's departure. And now Lebovits is back in control.... not good. Agreed that science is not enough. I think it is safer to short a stock when there is a impending dilution and the data read outs are further away in the time line. If the company isn't short of funds and there are pending near term data announcements, it is likely that the stock would bounce back quickly and squeeze the shorts. Great point on the bolded above. I've yet to short a company in my almost 10 years of investing and there's just been too many times when I've had pessimistic views of a company that I then watch go down the drain. I always look back and wonder, "Why didn't I short that? You knew the company wasn't in a good place". This just seemed like a brief one of those moments. Fiorino coming and going so quickly can only be looked at as a negative IMO. However, had he been replaced by someone more respectable than him this would obviously be a different story. |
|
