With respect, "Kettle, Pot"
People here are speaking to intent re Management, Social Media and all, but making judgements of a stock that they feel is finished, without definitive proof.
As I say, that may be right, it may however be wrong. The latest we have, as I understand it, is Becker (external( saying there's interest. My latest trade of significance was TSLA mid year at the height of the BYD concern, post Musks court case loss, battle re rem. Whilst a different company, etc, etc hopefully you can appreciate the contrarian nature of it. FYI I got out day 3 of the trade election trade. A day too early. But I was very close to the interim top. I also recently jumped into WTC the other day on the same oversold premise, so far so good. So I often trade in that style, contrary to say the technical./ momentum style espoused by WB.
Obviously my entry point here was momentum and a different play. The narrative and this chat has produced a more analytical approach to this stock. Essentially the market size relative to the current MC presents the opportunity, as was seen over the past 12 months or so with its run. Ive said many times, diversification, trading strategy etc are all mitigants to risk here (any stock, but obvious in a bio developer)
The emotion here is directed back and forth at disparate view over speculation as to intent of management. It usually comes from those with presumably excessive exposures for their comfort. Frequent poster here example is a perfect case in point. This is my car (not expensive, outdated, attitude toward it is uncomfortable), this is the amount of money I put into this stock ( indicating it seems to be a lot in their opinion), this is the impression I have of the behaviour ( there terrible, whatever) .... I leave that as vague as I have, but my point is that is explicitly demonstrable of poor trading strategy, yet the attitude is that the tech just should have worked. We can find inhumate other examples of the same premise.
This is a developer, the level of guarantee is not 100% that could be due the theory, the tech, the market, the competitor set, the policy ... whatever. When you carry on about CF, its not that your technically incapable of identifying that more cash is better than less, its that to me it represents a failure to comprehend the premise ie raise, do, progress, raise, do...
BTW Im not trying to say there's no distinction between doing that perfectly and doing it poorly. Equally the Comms/Ground up consumer strategy issue I spoke dismissively about and was criticised by the former madding crowd here for doing so. Equally from a little on the fly research as we go through this, I note there's complexity and regulatory constraint around all these issues.
To some extent the SP is the moral compass here, but its not 100%. SH are hopefully knowingly invested into a high risk environment. They have the right to not agree remuneration, vote for leadership, etc. They are also able to expect appropriate communication with management, expect that management are well intended etc. I think its fair to say that commenting on what someone has to drink on a holiday, and the like illustrates some loss of connection with the reality here. I don't presume like that. Maybe Ive seen too much 'better' behaviour in life
. I do accept that ill intent or indifference is not impossible here, but whos to say that the management of the situation is not more complex that we are aware.
Explain to me the relevance of posting in regard to a universities decision or otherwise to report on technology in its infancy 20 years ago,. that has subsequently demonstrated success?
So we can all do a 360 reflect, what Kumbaya? session ... not much point sitting around calling each other narcissistic", no you're narcissistic...
I take you're point, the cash is a defining concern (as it always will be in such raise and do endeavours), per my last I think its about whether we get a short term response on the "BP Interest" as described by "independent" Becker, or if Management can or a re interested in positioning a CR here. If the lights go off, what happens to the tech, the crowd will disperse and be grateful for anything, what happens then? Is that what all SH want?
The focus here can be myopic
I've
pointed out to you that final reports are in my experience not interim reports. They may ultimately come back "identical", they may contain different nuance. Im not in bio, that's a generalisation. Equally I posted re research earlier in the year in regard to how BP engage in the reporting / regulator process. Your statement is a clear expression of assumption around what among the most critical of issues facing this company.
You
may be correct, you
don't have definitive proof imo. Happy for you to try and articulate your case more effectively
Would I enter here? Knowing the back story, I think I would likely wait the AGM, maybe average in to some degree prior. Am I going "overweight" - No. Would I sell? what would be the motivation - capital return, crystallisation? Both a re low priorities given management of trades.
I do find it interesting that at some point the analysis of stock and marketplace almost exceeds the relevance of the stock for the diversified though, illustrates to some degree the involvement of non holders here.
Apologies I cant jump on the bandwagon blindly
DYOR
(20min delay)