Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
You are correct. But the algo trading I was referring to is different than HFT-front running, i.e., flash trading. Front running mainly involves an advantage in data speed and processing speed. It doesn’t add up to much of a difference to individual trades but it is significant in the aggregate.
The algos I am referring to figure out how to achieve a desired result: move the stock up or down, accumulate or distribute, etc. It relies significantly on collusion. Creating micro-trends that add up to macro trends. They take turns trading shares back and forth to each other to create the illusion of real trading when in reality it is not. Imagine if you and I could trade the same 100 shares back and forth to each other all day long at incrementally lower prices. The net cost to either of us is negligible but the appearance …
Oh, well they’ve been doing that for years. But I agree, they will likely figure out more efficient ways to steer the trades to themselves for wash trade purposes.
I’m not able to imagine how they could invent “new” TA. It’s basically math and a loose form of geometry. I think what the algos and AI will do is figure out ways to apply the TA. More accurately, more efficient ways to cause the results that they want. TA manipulation. The algos already do that. They are designed to do it.
The trading algos absolutely use TA. So does literally every professional human trader. That is the only reason it has any validity. Empirically, it would have no effect whatsoever.
I’ll accept that non-answer for what it is. A deflection.
I don’t understand your answer. The company has reiterated several times that all endpoints were met.
Do we know for certain yet what the endpoints were?
You seem to have developed quite an obsession with trying to convince people to sell. How many posts per day do you make at this point? 20?
I’m not sure what trial results you are looking at. And apparently the EMA disagrees with you. I think I’ll go with their view over yours.
Exactly. Nailed it.
Sure, pal. So what is your hypothesis as to why they haven’t filed in Australia, considering their huge hoard of cash that you observed? I’m sure it’s a baseless negative assumption so let’s hear it. Or did you not have a point?
Money is not the only resource. There is also personnel, man hours and focus.
Maybe they will file in Australia. We don’t know.
Yawn. Okay, you’re right. They haven’t filed in Australia because the trials were all fabricated, using crash test dummies. Is that what you want to hear?
Or is it that they are focusing on the larger European market first? I’ll let others decide. Enjoy whatever alternative conclusion you’re implying.
It is not a big issue for me whether they file the application next month or six months from now. I only care that it’s filed and accepted.
Go ahead and try to wait to buy, on your trade down strategy. Who cares? Personally, I will not sell any here. I’d be more likely to sell some investment shares if it was in the 20’s, as I did last time.
Those shares will wait until the outcome of the application process, whatever that may be.
So let’s see who’s right. They’ve had a window to work on the EMA application during the time that they are required to due to EMA rules. Not that they would otherwise submit it before the allowed time anyway.
Why haven’t they submitted in Australia? I assume they are prioritizing the larger markets first. They do not have unlimited resources. However, much of the work will be done for the first application so it will not have to be replicated.
“Keep your cool.”
You must be confusing me with someone else.
A baseless assumption, that the former FDA experts have secretly left the company. You make this assumption because you cannot dispute my point that we have noted experts who know how to handle regulatory processes.
So you don’t disagree with me. Instead you focus on current/future trials and predict they will take a long time. You ignore the fact that at least one, and likely two, applications for AD will occur much sooner than trial outcomes. You are welcome to your opinions. I stated mine.
Uh huh. If you really think Missling is going to personally prepare the AD applications you are kidding yourself. He has noted experts, both employees and a contractor, that will do that.
Your claim, in general, that Missling does not delegate technical tasks to specialized staff is baseless. You have zero access to the company’s internal operations, and you have no clue who does what. Your negative, repetitive presumption that he tries to do everything is meaningless.
No, it’s not. The team on the field ultimately wins or loses the baseball game, not the team’s general manager. The general manager tries to put the right people in place and lets them do what they do. Missling has assembled a very good team and the trial data itself is the most important factor anyway.
Missling has little or no relevance to trial outcomes or regulatory outcomes. I don’t care about him much either way.
What truth? And why would it hurt me? I couldn’t care less about the current manipulated share price, whether it is 3 or 30. Completely irrelevant, except to those who let emotions affect their judgment. All that matters is the ultimate outcome of the application process, and the outcome of current and future trials.
Former pumper turned compulsive basher. Kind of like TooTall.
Uh oh. Looks like someone’s handler fed him some TA nonsense to regurgitate.
I have no idea what they do all day. I don’t work there. But I would guess, for example, that they perform tasks consistent with their job titles.
I also don’t know what the employees of any other company do all day. Nor do I care. I’ll leave that to their management.
I have no reason to “be skeptical.” I don’t have a bashing agenda that I need to support with speculative nonsense.
I love the logic of these assumptions. Since we are not privileged to know what a particular employee does on a daily basis, because we don’t work for the company, let’s assume that he does little, or nothing. Even better, since we don’t know his daily activities, let’s assume that he secretly resigned. What a brilliant exercise in deductive reasoning.
Orcas. They know more than they let on.
Cossacks, I suspect. Or possibly Freemasons.
Yes. But, as I noted, directing trades back and forth between “friendly” parties is not foolproof because they can get intercepted by third parties. As a result, at some point the mm’s end up with a short position that exceeds their risk parameters and they have to reduce it. Or, their naked short position (which they are quasi-permitted to carry) time period runs out and they have to buy and deliver shares.
Manipulation with algo trading can generally only be done on a relatively transitory basis in one direction. A percentage of the attempted churn trades (collusive parties trading back and forth to each other) get intercepted by others. The interest on the short positions is another factor.
The exception is when the suppression actually damages a company’s financial position, i.e., they are forced to keep issuing shares at lower and lower prices and even sometimes run out of cash. That will not happen here because they would have to keep the price consistently suppressed for several years. Now you know why Missling always keeps a large cash cushion. He knows all too well how it works.
As usual, you revert to personal attacks and labels. Your initial comment was that the CHMP might not accept the application because they, all of a sudden, despite having already seen the data in a summary review, deem it unlikely to be approved.
I was merely pointing out that this is a pessimistic, and relatively unlikely, premise.
You are confusing me with those who are “WGT”. Which term you categorically assign to anyone who even slightly questions any opinion that you put forth.
This doesn’t make sense to me. Why, and how, would the CHMP conclude, before the application is completed/accepted, that the substantive results are not good enough? Any perceived deficiencies in the application, it would seem to me, would be procedural/technical as opposed to substantive, no?
Barring some clearly fatal flaw in the trial methodology or the validity of the data, or a fatal error in the statistical analysis, the agency will accept the application and decide based on substance, right?
There was more buying volume than selling today and the last few candles were green also. Yet the stock closed down 6%+. A neat trick but not unusual. I suspect they may be running out of ammo. Not literally. Of course they have more funds, if they choose. I mean they may be getting antsy from a risk-reward standpoint. No guarantees. Such are the whims of the mm-hedge fund traders. Although one of their backdrops is time. So the equation is really “risk-reward-time”. This is why, when they see a presentation with nothing new, and no firm prediction of imminent news, they move the stock down. They think they will get out of the trade later, while they to try to play on investors’ patience.
As the hedgie agents like to say, “kick the can down the road.”
None of this has any bearing on actual substance. It’s a game.
These posts are so much more stupid than anything the so called “pumpers” put forth. Oddly (?) nobody ever complains about this. Surely you could come up with something more intelligent? Or are you relying on repitition?
Yep. They are manipulating it to an inflection point. And they will be laughing over their martinis at Harry’s about the dupes who held for years only to sell at the low right before “Thank you for playing, we have a lovely door prize for you on your way out. You paid for our drinks.”
Good explanation. What would be common reasons, if any, that the interested parties would decline participation in the trial?
Trust me, I find your words far more meaningless than Missling’s.
They may be flushing some people out who are unwisely on margin or have stop loss orders set but otherwise I think the shares are mainly being churned or they are coming from bandwagon shorts jumping in.
If they are committed then I think the medical staff can order whatever meds they want, no?
Thank you, your opinion is less than meaningless to me.
Thank you for that reasoned comment. Just what I was looking for. Maybe true, maybe not, but it is at least something other than a guess, or wishful thinking.