They threatened to pull it based on a regulatory technicality. Could be a blessing, though, if there is considerable petitioning.

Anyway, the value of the company is not based on its' supplement sales, but on their potential IP value as a drug candidate. Not that you needed a reasoned reply.

I don't disagree wih that statement. I just don't agree that antbloc can be grouped in with 41000 compounds looking to enter the pharmaceutical radar. For instance, it already has a market, unlike almost every other fledgling biotech. The route they took is a blessing and a curse, a blessing because of the evidence of efficacy in mid-stage studies and thousands of users, and a curse because of the reputation of supplements in treating medical conditions. Until the transformation to a biotech takes hold, anatabine won't be considered a serious pharma prospect. Even still, the IP will have to be solid.

Re: the picture - what do you think?

How strong is the IP on Antbloc? Do they have the synthetic process patented? Are there other companies manufacturing synthetic versions? With JW being more of a scientific hack, and given his dubious track record, I wonder how secure the technology and IP are.

Any insightful comments are welcome.

OT-

I agree. Aligning yourself with one side, and only one side, is flawed by design. Both sides are corrupted and influenced heavily by lobbyists.

That's a very weak generalization.

I suppose that's what it looks like. So why would he choose to walk into a 'disaster'? Seems illogical.

?

I asked you a specific question about Dr Mullan's employment as CEO and Board Chair. What do you make of Mullan's decision to assume the role?

Bottomline: I don't care about his legal problems. I'm not caught up in that soap opera.

I'm long because of the leadership changes and the drop in share price.

So...because he gave gifts/loans to a governor friend, and is cooperating with the Fed's on the public official's case, you presume he's going to jail? My point of my inquiry was to see how far you would go on the speculative limb.

There appears to be some improprieties going on -- mostly 'favors' -- and that it was in JW's, STSI's, and shareholders best interests for him to step down, but if it is as bad as you speculate, why do you think Dr Mullan would have agreed to take over? Seems like he would have a lot more to lose than gain.

I'll retract my statement, calling JW brilliant for stepping down, and label it sensible. But I stand by it for getting Mullan as the new Chief. Fair enough?

Going to jail for what? Giving gifts?

So how would being a "cooperating witness" impact his role as CEO? Clue me in, I can't understand your logic.

Jonnie stepping down was a brilliant move, and hiring the prominent Dr. Mullan, equally so. It doesn't translate into success, but adds considerable credibility. Seems like JW has a remarkable way of staying one or two steps ahead of everyone else. I'm glad I didn't invest under his leadership (or, rather,only briefly), but what a fascinating story.

Exactly (eom)

Yes - Like a good poker player, he should reveal his cards. Maybe he should have repeated himself 5 times also...

Are you talking about that trader's hot-headed, short-sighted, one-sided, self-serving rant?

Many companies lose money, carry debt, face lawsuits and regulatory obstacles, and deceive consumers and investors (I would argue most). Welcome to the New Age!. Given what the TOO Big's (etal) got away with in the last 15 years, seems running amok is the norm. Hasn't changed one iota under Obama either.

He said it best when he said, "I dislike this stock". The rest was mostly noise.

It has gone from 1 to 4.5+ a handful of times.

Please - that is incredibly bad wishful thinking.

The heavy bashing is pretty ridiculous too.



Speaking hypothetically, what to good long-term investors do when a stock sucks? Do they sell near the low, or buy more towards the bottom, or do nothing?

That's pretty disingenuous. Some, myself included, are trying to be reasonable and realistic. MWM began to rant and rave in a gratuitous fashion. In other words, it was overkill.

Rule #1 of a good trader: Don't get personal.

This is what you cited:

"Its accumulated deficit as of Dec. 31, 2012 was $231.5 million"


Yes, rhetoric. Tell me the minimum this company was worth (market cap, anyway) from March 2010-November 2013?

Perhaps the future will confirm your rhetoric, but that still doesn't make it a Fact.

Sounds like a risky biotech to me. If others don't feel they are invested in that, that's on them. Hopefully it doesn't take another 10 years to develop a pharma version, and if it does, hopefully more evidence on the therapeutic benefit comes to light, so the supplement can thrive. Could, fo' sho', go the other way too. It is probably a very expensive product, fwiw, but so are cigarettes, many drugs, etc, and people suck 'em all down like soda!

I guess you could say he has an "investment" in STSI:

#msg-95876593

Maybe he's upset that he thought the CC was today. LOL

I think it is akin to having some reputable people on your BOD: It's just a meaningless plug by the company, and money in the pocket for those guys.

Your first point is mostly rhetoric. As far as your second question: Yes, it costs plenty of money. Like any investment, speculative or otherwise, it can go either way.

There has got to be another reason you have decided to vent: I don't think the ignorance meter has spiked any more than usual here. Perhaps it's a trading loss, or something more personal. Just sayin'...

I don't see why they can't develop a stronger form of anatabine -- patent it, and go thru trials -- while they have a supplemental form over-the-counter. I understand there is a possible issue with trumped up claims...

Yes, we longs are so blissfully in the know, aren't we?

I think you made your point. eom

I can't attest to all of that, now...

It does sound like JW was kind of shady, but with lots of charisma. I'm not a fan of car salesman, in general, either. The good thing is, whatever STSI/Anatabloc was based on -- legitimate, illegitimate, or quasi-legitimate science/business -- it is being transformed. Agreed that the new leadership seems like a big plus (that, and the low, low price {lol}, is why I bought in). I like that they have a product and revenue (unlike most small biotechs), notwithstanding the present hurdles as a result of that product. I don't like the synthetic route, but perhaps that is the only option when creating a pharmaceutical-grade product.

I think the con-man/snake oil thing is exaggerated, but then again, the same could be said about the aggrandizement on the bull side also. I'm assuming there are limited barriers to entry in the supplemental market (for anatabine compounds) if the product currently is as 'revolutionary' as some on this board contend. That is where my belief on its' 'subtlety' comes in. In it's current form taken properly (dosage-wise), it probably provides modest relief in general. If you are taking 20 or more pills a day, you are taking too much (there are other not so healthy ingredients in the pills, too). Thus the need for a more concentrated product However, risks will likely possibly increase as the 'drug' is made more potent (welcome to the world of biotech!).

The combo/cocktail angle for various indications is another logical and potentially lucrative direction. As we would say on the other biotech board when there was still hope, "it should be interesting"!

If you are right -- and that is quite possible -- why would you call him a "dreamer?. After all, he is the one making money now, not the one hoping for it to turn into the next ICPT!

It only bothers me that you can't admit you are a pumper, a hypster, thus a manipulator. I don't like manipulators. No sense in bogging the board down with this: just be more responsible, and you won't get called out. It's that simple.

Let me get this straight. STSI is the next ICPT x 20 ? Is that correct? When will STSI, then, become a BP? I'd like to get a head start on buying my own donut franchise...

This whole debate is gibberish. Your rigid definition of gibberish is gibberish. Can we knock off the gibberish?

I never said STSI does not have massive potential (note: I did say I think it has subtle potential, but I meant efficaciously, based on the current pill form - not in terms of investment potential), just that it is extremely premature to assume so at this juncture, and based on your 'evidence'. Prudence Mr Smith, there are a lot of headwinds* creating considerable uncertainty...

*= a metaphor for 'resistance'

It's one thing to witness 2 or 3 supplement users' dramatic improvement and speculate on the cause, and an entirely other thing to dogmatically preach the miracle of a supplement, and prophetize in some esoteric way what great things are to come from this compound and to these investors. You could be the CEO, CSO, or a study's PI, and you still wouldn't know what you claim is 'correct'. It is impossible to be correct or right when what you say is going to happen has not happened yet, no?

I say - wish all you want, just don't tell me what grandiose things are going to happen down the road.

Well...I'm not voting against you, but you've been warned :)

Ps. gibberish = gobbly gook = BS. If you want to differentiate them, that's all you.

I here ya'. I think the product benefited me before, and hope it benefits me again. But I emphasize its 'modest' benefit, and that typically doesn't make for incredible study results or blockbuster drugs. Sounds like you made a conservative choice to bail. I was drawn in by price -- I've been waiting for it to come down for a couple years -- and alas! But I still got in too early, lol. Now I'm thinkin' I'm falling into that trap of putting good money into bad by following losers: a classic newbie mistake. Oh well...

Good one. I love guarantees. You know what I guarantee? I guarantee that if we make money, it had nothing to do with you guaranteeing it. I mean, really, what do you have to gain by saying that? Perhaps I should ask the opposite. What do you have to lose? Hmmm, that's it. Nothing. Sounds like you came out of a boiler room...

Let me guess -- you think I'm a shorty too?

Whatever you feel makes you happier, healthier and/or better, good for you. Who am I to criticize? Whether it's religion, anatabloc, swinging, placebo pills, it doesn't matter. As long as you're not hurting others, right? Leif just happens to think BS is fair game, and I'm calling him out on it. I just suggested he tone down his rhetoric, thus bringing more credibility to this board. By all means, he should keep doing what he's doing. I'm sure he does an outstanding job staying, and keeping others, informed. Unfortunately, I must have entered at a bad time :) I just feel the pumping sends a mixed signal, and dilutes his significance. He can keep doing it, and I can keep calling him out. That's the freedom we all embrace, right?

I happen to be a little more skeptical. I think it has potential, subtle potential, with a variety of ailments/disorders (physical, psychiatric, neurological). But, it's not much of a stretch to see how the bias of a combined consumer and shareholder may inflate one's perspective on efficacy. I believe in anecdotal evidence, but also understand the risk of relying on it.

I used it last year for smoking cessation. I am a true believer in nicotine's medicinal benefits (yet morbidly aware of the risk of lung disease). I'm sure some of that benefit comes from anatabine, but I'm also sure it is not the only compound providing symptomatic relief. I feel it did take the edge off of my cravings, but I recidivated anyway. I also experience chronic pain from a very physical job and very active lifestyle. Those pains I self-diagnosed as inflammation related. As I recall, if there was any pain relief, it was small. Then there is the mood stabilizing benefit of smoking, which may actually be a false benefit,controlled by active nicotine levels. At any rate, I'm smoke free since the New Year, and waiting on my two containers of anatabloc, so we'll see. In addition, I'm a shareholder at 1.75, and tripled up at .96c. I'm acutely aware that I might get burned (the odds are clearly against the longs), but I do see the potential, and I try to be a believer -- I just try harder not to be a blind one.

Gibberish can also refer to meaningless text. Those examples I provided (which are more numerous then two) are nothing more than baseless pumps, premature hype, and ridiculous comparisons (see link below). It's not that I disagree with them per se, there is simply zero, or not enough evidence, to back them up. I see that you are a good contributor with some support, just keep it real. Words like 'massive', and 'enormous,' add nothing. They just sensationalize your message. Anatabloc is not the Holy Grail, the Silver Bullet, the end-all-be-all. There is no such thing. Do you here what I'm saying? I tried to give you some creds based on a cursory summary of your recent posts, but not conceding to your silly, amateur pumps is not helping your case. Prudence -- waiting for the trials and larger sample size to confirm, for example -- is the better part of valor, right? I speak from experience after all.

Like I said, I'm just trying to help you. Your statements look desperate when coupled with a bottomed-out stock price. A hardened/seasoned investor sees that right away. They also notice silly and subtle 'apple and orange' comparisons, like yours here (pun intended):

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=95749741

At least you stopped short of calling Star the next Aapl, lol.

These, I believe, are from the last 24 hours alone. In your defense, however, I didn't see anything egregious beyond that, going back a week or so. Actually, many of your other (posts) seem reasonable to me. I'm new, so I might just be overly biased due to those first stumbled upon.