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.
Once in a while you get a wonky bid ask on the new options series. Does not appear to be the case for LWLG in August
This is routine across symbols with options. Generally, the Monday after monthly expiry they will add the monthly options for two months out if it is not already there, i.e. adding August today after June expiry on Friday.
This is common and in no way indicate anything unusual happening with LWLG or any expectations re: LWLG.
If you poke around you will find that a lot of tickers have a new August options series today.
There almost certainly is someone at LWLG already working on this, but as a sidelight from their "real" job. That they are making this a full-time position speaks a lot to the applications being pretty open-ended , scalable and possibly customizable.
I would think that the person in this job is going to use computer modeling to simulate what the effects of various tweaks to the formulation might be. Additionally I suspect you could probably write a computer model that would simulate many years of operation. They might also be able to model tweaks to the manufacturing process.
Just guessing.
Thanks for posting that. Now I know what a "Computational Chemist" is. Learn something new every day!
Part of this is due to the fact that everyone is LOOKING FOR A SCAPEGOAT rather than LOOKING IN THE MIRROR.
It's far easier to holler "MM manipulation" than to admit that you made a bad decision, don't really understand how the markets work, or both.
Additionally, much of the angst comes from people who are NOT trying to become professional traders, but rather from dabblers who trade as a hobby or only as a relatively minor focus of their time (I would be in this group, and I spend a lot of time on markets compared to many).
Right - market makers don't hold any substantial inventory or build up inventory of shares over a period of time.
They don't speculate on the direction of a stock because they simply don't need to - they make their money whether it goes up or down.
The timing of the print (at 2 seconds after the close) for the 220K share trade suggests this was a position the MM accumulated for a specific buyer during the day.
A big buyer - as that trade required almost $1.5MM
Doubt it, as volume is only a little more than normal and the price has tailed off late in the day. However, I'd love to be wrong on that call.
The whole market sold off at that time - no one had to do anything to manipulate the price of a GFS share to go under 60, and no one has had to apply any pressure to keep it there
Doesn't matter as there is no news - those articles are just a rehash of old stuff.
Oops - I misspoke. Numbers are still small though - 44 open interest June 45, 265 at 50, some more at 55 and a good number at 60. Only the 45s would be in play today as the 50s and above are well out of the money.
July looks nominal as well. it would take too long to post all the numbers for July and all the way out to Jan 2024 to cover "going forward".
I would find the open interest and volume numbers for LWLG options to be more of interest than those for GFS...
I doubt that explains anything - the open interest on GFS 45 calls (at the money) is only 58 contracts. That is a very trivial amount - usually it takes thousands of contracts to make it worth manipulating the price of the underlying common on expiration day.
Agree - both "maybe" and "soon" are wishy-washy.
We need some evidence that VDRM can actually manufacture and distribute and sell their products on a continuous basis. So far we have no evidence that their incidental sales can be scaled or continued.
My mental picture of VDRM's "production line" is Dr. Otiko wearing ski goggles and stirring a steaming foul-colored brew in his bathtub.
No one misses the Mediocre Melon
I don't put a lot of weight on tweets. It would be a big deal to have sales to XOM, but I will believe it when I see a formal PR and/or an 8K (preferably the latter).
Thank you - thought it might be a symbol typo as CRSP is not really the kind of stock this board focuses on.
Is CRSP the right symbol? That comes up as Crispr Therapeutics, a $64 NASDAQ stock.
Nice. Lots of credibility to be gained when you work with a Fortune 50 company.
I worked for years for one of XOM's large competitors, and have some experience with procurement processes. Getting your product approved for use and getting an actual PO is no small feat when dealing with these guys.
There is no reason to do a split at all unless there is a merger. Therefore I would expect to see merger news concurrent with or soon after any FORMAL split announcement. By formal, I mean an SEC filing, not a PR or a tweet.
Good info - let us know what you find out.
It is entirely up the the company, but in general companies file the registration to remove the restriction on or immediately after the first date this is possible. In other words, if XXXX issues restricted shares today with a one-year restriction, they would file the registration on or just after 6/16/23.
However, this is not automatic, as the company actually has to do that filing.
The reason that they almost always come off restriction right at the expiry of the originally stated period is that this is the expectation of the parties who took those restricted shares in the first place, and if a company does not do the registration in a timely fashion then it is pretty certain that company will never be able to issue restricted shares again as no one would accept them.
I do not know when the QENC restricted shares were issued or for how long they were restricted - you can look that up in the filings.
Your reasoning is very flawed.
If the foundries aren't working with SOMEBODY on the next generation of chips then they won't be part of the next generation of chips!
Whether or not they are working with LWLG, you can be 100% certain that they have planning/R&D groups that are focused solely on the future and have nothing to do with current manufacturing or supply chain management.
The spinoff has nothing to do with any separation of the thermal paint from the rest of their portfolio. They are INTK common shares, restricted for a year, nothing more and mothing less.
Yes - the consensus appears to be to move forward very slowly if at all.
Perhaps he is in the WITLESS protection program.
1 - I don't know. Probably never until they are registered as unrestricted (see below), and then they would simply convert to additional INTK common shares
2 - they are restricted for one year, so 6/6/23 (one year from the actual payable date) would be the earliest. It might not happen precisely on the one year anniversary, as INTK has to file to "register" those shares for free trading. Something of a formality, but INTK has to do this, it is generally NOT automatic.
3 - Prospectively they would have the same value as common shares at any point in time, but given that you can't trade them and they are not marginable (and therefore can not provide collateral for buying something else), does it really matter what the value is right now?
Let's talk about it again in June of next yea. Until then, there is nothing more to be said.
Update on dividend status at Schwab - INTK dividend shares just posted to my Schwab accounts (literally while I was on the phone enquiring about them!). Since they are restricted they show under a different CUSIP (456CNT012) rather than under INTK itself. The shares show on the Schwab web site but as yet not through the SSE trading platform.
I personally doubt that. I don't think K was hired by LWLG's possible competition. They were hired by someone who has a more direct financial interest in seeing LWLG's stock price go lower.
Foundries making decisions about the next generation of technology are certainly not going to be influenced by a piece from K. They have their own technology and market experts.
Competitors would be more interested in discrediting the tech Anything that they put out to attempt to do that would be debated by technical experts in technical forums - not on iHub or Seeking Alpha or Stocktwits..
This is all about someone trying to force LWLG's stock price down in the short term.
Yes. Click on their name on one of their posts. It should be hyperlinked to their profile. On the left side of the profile click “ignore this member”.
Your life will be immediately better.
Over time, big players have got smarter about handling the Russell changes. While the index funds themselves can't add new companies before the actual reconstitution date, other fund managers can see what is coming and front-run the shares, making for less of a spike on the actual reconstitution date. They can also work out a side deal to buy in advance of the date and sell to the index fund on the reconstitution date and split the difference. Any big player front running like this is probably selling those shares to the index funds in off-market transactions that don't reflect in the current bid and ask.
There is no special consideration that would knock LWLG out of the Russell.
When you see the notices from law firms about "investigations", the NEVER have a lead plaintiff at that point. That is how class actions work, eventually all those suits get consolidated into one "class action" suit, generally with the firm that has the most sympathetic lead plaintiff in the most litigant-favorable court.
Incidentally - there is no investigation by any government agency. Even the law firms don't dig deeper until they have a lead plaintiff and a good chance of being the survivor that runs the consolidated class action. They use the word "investigation" as a scare tactic.
"They" are not deciding which companies will go into the Russell indices - the market is deciding. It is entirely a function of market cap and a couple knock-out criteria (i.e. no derivative securities).
If you are long, Schwab won't let you short in the same account, you would have to close the long position first. LWLG shows as hard to borrow, and Schwab has a 100% margin maintenance requirement on LWLG, but I did not get any kind of message saying "security can not be shorted".
I agree, that is why I am still here.
It has been a pivotal year - we pivoted DOWN.
All of those things have been true for a long time, yet here we still are.
Add one other thing to the list - a majority owner who has absolutely no urgency to sell the shell or merge anything into it.
I doubt that. Like it or not, the Kerrisdale piece is lengthy and detailed. No way that was composed on the fly in response to positive market action after the ASM.
More likely, as another poster noted, the ASM confirmed to Kerrisdale and whoever is paying them that a snort term positive surprise was unlikely and they could proceed as planned.
Could be that the lack of definitive announcements at the ASM was a further contributing factor. That certainly would suggest there was little likelihood of being blind-sided by a surprise positive announcement in the very short term.
For the record, I never said or implied NAKED shorts - I simply said that this was a window of opportunity for any large short to exit.