just a ramble for mg, page-2

Hi Southoz,

Thanks. That was a refreshing perspective.

Remembering Murphy's Law is always wise, especially in the spec end of the market. Certainly, I have found Murphy to be correct time and again. My latest example is TZL and its parcel locker deal with Australia Post. There were 4 clear points in TZL's favour:

1. Star businessperson and business educator at the helm - Mark Bouris.
2. An experienced partner company with deep involvement with Australia Post - Pitney Bowes.
3. TZL brought the parcel locker idea to Australia Post.
4. TZL had superior technology (supposedly).

So everything seemed to be headed for a deal. But Pitney Bowes was in charge and they lost the tender. I thought TZL and PB would put in a cheap tender to get their first deal for POC for other markets. Regardless, even losing the tender would have been tolerable, except that TZL said in the announcement that they weren't going to break even until the end of the financial year, which contradicted their previous claims about profitability from multiple corners. Amazing double-whammy.

Some people have put around 70% of their capital on OBJ. It seems to be like gambling even if they have done detailed research. It's too risky to bet all in against Murphy's Law, IMO. I've been surprised to see some people putting hundreds of thousands on spec companies that end up collapsing.

"...from a swing traders perspective not only is the GSK collaboration completely irrelevant – its dangerous to even think about it. Its this sort of news that creates the hope that keeps you in a losing position."

On holding losing positions: Many people on HC threads after a bad announcement say that they will hold their stock for the long-term based on potential. Even if they are in it for the long-term, they should sell the open and buy back in a week's time at 33% discount. Of course, the trouble with OBJ is that you don't know when a deal could land. There again, there are always plenty of other opportunities out there.

"What earth was I using a swing trading set up for something I had never envisaged it for – or set it for – or tested it for - on a share you accidently type into software…"

Yeah, it's interesting to analyse our trades. Regarding OBJ, I was a beginner in biotech and HC, and I noticed which stocks were getting attention on HC and saw which posters seemed knowledgeable, and I followed their leads. Then I became increasingly interested in OBJ - reading the announcements and some of the science, and gradually gaining some general knowledge about the sector from reading the knowledgeable posters. I also got caught up in the constant positivity. But then I saw popular "experts" in other sectors get it terribly wrong, so I became wary. Some of the experts were extremely knowledgeable, yet they still got it very wrong, and if experts can be wrong, then I can more easily be wrong. So when more OBJ competitors were revealed, and more disappointing announcements from spec companies came out, it was time to start reducing my OBJ holding.

Nevertheless, I'm still willing to bet a small amount. I reckon, OBJ will get a deal from GSK based on the evidence so far. And the upside makes it worth the risk, IMO. Of course, the deal might be so complicated or confidential that we will have to wait another year for share price appreciation! As timelines lengthen, more can go wrong. So this will be my last medium to long-term bet. It's just a horrible feeling being dependent on some announcement that may never come - like waiting for Godot. It's been a great lesson in many ways.

Beware Murphy's Law - that belongs on the top of this computer monitor.

MG.