“It's you who is always on the offensive, making negative claims about MSB.”
It was you that attacked my position concerning the company’s funding adequacy beyond the next 12 months.
It was you who said I was being “disingenuous” and that my view was inaccurate, making reference to milestone payments from TEVA and revenues from the launch of product sales in Japan.
You have accused me of speculating and yet, to date, you have never been able to provide any basis in fact for your countering arguments.
Meaning you, too, are doing little more than speculating, yourself.
If I am so wrong in my assessment that the company is under-funded to the point of self-sustaining commercialisation, then – for the umpteenth time - prove it.
Otherwise, what is "disingenuous" is to pretend you have the answers to the company's funding requirements when, patently, you do not.
"If people are prepared to research this company, instead of relying on what passes for analysis in HC, they will see the opportunities."
They will also be able to see through the ambit claims of certain posters which are trotted out as being faitaccompli, when they are little more than unsubstantiated guesswork (for example, unsubstantiated claims such as, "MSB is not underfunded to the point of self-sustaining commercialisation because Teva will make milestone payments and Japanese revenues will occur before the company's cash reserves are depleted in about 12 months' time".)
“What is the cost benefit analysis for time expended on stock not held? At some point a conclusion is reached the stock is either worth accumulating or not worth accumulating.”
It takes as long as it takes.
I wish it could somehow be expedited, by that's not what happens, I'm afraid.
I have been known to follow developments within, and surrounding, some companies for years before the situation became appropriate for investment.
(Let me know if you want me to provide some relevant case studies.)
And often, a conclusion is simply not reached, other than not to invest but to keep monitoring and remain up to date.
But that's investing for you.
Would you like to dictate the rules as to what you deem to be the “right” amount of time for someone to follow the developments of a company before making an investment?
Are you suggesting that one should only be permitted to expend only a certain amount of time on a stock, after which point one should either buy the stock, or cease following it?
Frankly, I have never ever come across anyone who invests on the basis of saying to themselves; "I will spend just x weeks researching company X, at which I will either buy the shares, or I will thereafter cease any further interest whatsoever in the business. I won't read about it; I won't listen to anyone speak about it, I won't keep up to date on developments about it; I will just forever put it out of my mind because I have already afforded it the maximum permissible time allocation."
“You get rich by making careful selections and having a lot of patience”
Precisely.
That’s exactly what I’m doing.
I am being patient waiting for clarity on certain aspects of the company before I commence buy the shares.
Ipso, I am adhering to your very own investment mantra.
The exercising of patience.
MSB Price at posting:
$4.28 Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
(20min delay)