All companies are ruthless, it's just a question of...

All companies are ruthless, it's just a question of degree.

Instead of Teva, I'd focus on the MSB management who hold key amount of shares. A takeover cannot occur without their agreement. That they bothered to set this up means a degree of security to me and it's more security than you get with most emerging companies. I think Itescu and others have learnt from what happens with other aussie biotechs and have tried to insulate themselves from a takeover by taking out such a massive stake in the company. Itescu is already hugely wealthy and I cannot see him selling out: this is his life's work. But it's not certain, no.

Further, bots cannot hold back a SP rise which is fueled by anns which show imminent revenue gains. So which is first? A takeover or the anns? I'd say they will have to move soon if they are going to move at all and I don't see any signs that way. I've been wrong before. I think it's just accumulators and seems to be more than one bot, but I'm no trading expert.

It seems the bots are doing their evil business on just about every stock I hold...except the dogs. Which is probably a good sign.