Thread Rating:

darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 8928
August 30th, 2021 at 12:26:59 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Oz says he paid $4 a share.


An oldie but a goodie:
August 14th, 2020 at 9:29:12 PMpermalink


This company was dead in the water, with its stock being worth a nickel when a man with a doctorate in Mechanical Drawing and no pharma experience was able to wrangle control of it. He convinced a few private investors to pony up 12 million dollars and replaced the board of directors that was heavily pharma oriented with people associated with the private investors. They then announced plans to research, develop, and market a drug that had an estimated annual market in the 20 million dollar range. Because of its limited market, they were able to fast track it under the FDAs "Orphan drug" program where they claim a drug has limited potential and isn't worth the money to go through the usual process. Then they tried to tie this drug in with every disease under the sun, and proclaimed it had a potential cap of between 2.5 billion and 9 billion, despite not having produced a single dose for commercial use. In line with their 9 billion dollar potential cap, they make a splashy deal with the infamous Martin Shkreli's Turing Pharma under its newest name. The deal sounds great, $8.75 billion dollar contract, only it's worthless until the FDA approves the drug for that particular use.
Suddenly Corona virus hits, the company makes some incredulous claims without any evidence, the stock soars and insiders start dumping shares.



$3.44 per share at this time.

Where is the link or credit for the quote?

And what do bloggers or opinions from whoever posted this matter?

Trials are ongoing. The FDA looking forward to further trials. If you feel the drug is such an unmitigated disaster why don't you write the FDA asking why they are willing to move forward with future trials for a drug that you believe is worthless?
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 203
  • Posts: 12074
August 30th, 2021 at 12:27:48 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

Looking for those words Bill.

Please point to those words or you made it up?




Is the whole point of your inane argument that the FDA only said the trial failed to reach achieve any of it's endpoints or its secondary points but didn't use the words total failure.
Meanwhile, you keep insisting it almost met its mark.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 203
  • Posts: 12074
August 30th, 2021 at 12:31:05 PM permalink
Quote: darkoz

$3.44 per share at this time.

Where is the link or credit for the quote?

And what do bloggers or opinions from whoever posted this matter?

Trials are ongoing. The FDA looking forward to further trials. If you feel the drug is such an unmitigated disaster why don't you write the FDA asking why they are willing to move forward with future trials for a drug that you believe is worthless?




$1.31 in the real world. Evidently $3.44 in Oz's.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
unJon
unJon
Joined: Jul 1, 2018
  • Threads: 14
  • Posts: 3022
August 30th, 2021 at 12:32:46 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

$1.31 in the real world. Evidently $3.44 in Oz's.

Huh? Hes saying his weighted average buy price is $3.44 at this time.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 8928
August 30th, 2021 at 12:34:41 PM permalink
Quote: billryan

Is the whole point of your inane argument that the FDA only said the trial failed to reach achieve any of it's endpoints or its secondary points but didn't use the words total failure.
Meanwhile, you keep insisting it almost met its mark.



Because you don't understand medical trials.

Have you examined all the data? Not the single snippet supplied by the FDA which is hardly the total picture but all the data.

Missing the endpoints are a matter of P-value measurements with P-value needing to be less than .005

So if the results are .006, that's failure.

I would say that's just missing the mark but missed nonetheless.

That type of miss (and I don't have the numbers up in front of me but they were close) is why the FDA didn't say your ridiculous words "Total failure".

That's why the FDA is looking forward to future trials if the company decided to move forward.

I understand your lack of knowledge in this area makes you just see the words"failed endpoints" as more than the total story.

You claimed you have done very little research into the science. This is the result.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
darkoz
darkoz
Joined: Dec 22, 2009
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 8928
August 30th, 2021 at 12:35:41 PM permalink
Quote: unJon

Huh? Hes saying his weighted average buy price is $3.44 at this time.



Thank you, Unjon.

Precisely.
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 203
  • Posts: 12074
August 30th, 2021 at 1:02:49 PM permalink
That's why the FDA is looking forward to future trials if the company decided to move forward.


Say what? Now I'll play your elementary school games. Where did the FDA say they were looking forward to another trial by them?
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 15039
August 30th, 2021 at 1:14:11 PM permalink
Average Down

This has nothing to do with DarkOz, but I wanted to take a moment and just say for anyone reading that blind, "Average Down," is a terrible strategy, unless you have a good reason to be doing it. I couldn't even tell you how many individual stocks have resulted in people getting killed on that, and that's just of people I have talked to.

Remember this---if you're averaging down, then the stock is already worth less (market price) than it was when you bought it.

Instead, don't average down for its own sake. This is especially true if you are an investor, as opposed to a trader. Ask yourself, "Based on the information I have now, which is more information than I had when I first bought the stock, would I buy the stock at this price if I did not already own it?"

If the answer is yes, then you might consider picking up more.

If the answer is no, then do not average down.

This can sometimes be different for traders who might be expecting (for one reason or another) a short-term bump up in price, but not quite to the price point where they made their initial stock buy.

NOTE: It sounds like Darkoz believes in this company, so he might have been averaging down because he saw the lower share price as a bargain and actually expects the price to eventually climb above his initial buy point.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 132
  • Posts: 15039
August 30th, 2021 at 1:19:02 PM permalink
Here's an article I wrote about penny stocks:

https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/playing-the-pennies-stocks/

Please keep in mind that I am not an expert, not even close. I have a passing knowledge of how everything works and a background in Economics that I mostly don't use for anything. That said, it takes a general look at things to look out for and a deep look into TOP Ships (TOPS) which is actually a Nasdaq listed company and, arguably, the most guilty company of any (that is actually listed still) when it comes to price manipulation games.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 203
  • Posts: 12074
August 30th, 2021 at 1:37:06 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

Average Down

This has nothing to do with DarkOz, but I wanted to take a moment and just say for anyone reading that blind, "Average Down," is a terrible strategy, unless you have a good reason to be doing it. I couldn't even tell you how many individual stocks have resulted in people getting killed on that, and that's just of people I have talked to.

Remember this---if you're averaging down, then the stock is already worth less (market price) than it was when you bought it.

Instead, don't average down for its own sake. This is especially true if you are an investor, as opposed to a trader. Ask yourself, "Based on the information I have now, which is more information than I had when I first bought the stock, would I buy the stock at this price if I did not already own it?"

If the answer is yes, then you might consider picking up more.

If the answer is no, then do not average down.

This can sometimes be different for traders who might be expecting (for one reason or another) a short-term bump up in price, but not quite to the price point where they made their initial stock buy.

NOTE: It sounds like Darkoz believes in this company, so he might have been averaging down because he saw the lower share price as a bargain and actually expects the price to eventually climb above his initial buy point.


I don't disagree with this at all, except if you are buying a certain amount per month. All through college, I bought
$20 a month of ATT and $15 a month from a company that eventually merged with Proctor and Gamble. In those cases, I wouldn't even look at the price, be it up or down. Back in those days, I had to actually write a check out and mail it to them. In general, buying on the down is a rookie mistake that almost everyone makes.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.

  • Jump to: