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.
The future is a wonderful thing.
Oops. That upward trend came crashing down pretty quick.
The fluffy pr helped some people sell about 100k shares in the 30's, but then reality set in.
I stand corrected. I found it.
Of course the word "appears" is key to deciphering that statement.
Personally, I think the "correction" is not nearly over. I don't see any support until .15 and that's where I have lowered my repurchase target.
I just scoured Schwab's page for DECN research and I found this:
The share price will take care of itself, one way or the other, whether you support it at the ask or not.
It's not the job of retail investors to keep a company's stock propped up.
My premature conclusion should be right at home here.
JNJ apparently doesn't want or need to buy DECN.
Who they are is sealed.
It's a great flipping company. Since i lost some money on it three or four years (I forget how much, it's nothing I linger on), I've already recouped some of it back by flipping it. It's not yet in buying range for another flip. The way it looks now, I'll be able to buy some back if i want in the 20s and maybe even the teens.
ONE SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED TO SEE THIS UNDER A DIME. ITS BIG WAS TO GO THROUGH THE ROOF ON ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE SETTLEMENT BUT SINCE THAT ISN'T GOING TO HAP[PEN, IT'S ONLY CHANCE OF GOING UP WILL BE THROUGH SALES. I SUPPOSE WE COULD START GETTING REPORTS OF PROFITABLE REVENUE COMING IN DURING 2017, BUT WHERE WILL STOCK BE THEN?
By the way, welcome to the DECN board. You certainly bring a storehouse of information with you.
They were certainly selling then too. They have too many to "get out", and they do don't just dump all their shares at once. They were selling in the .50s and they're selling in the 30s. It looks like they'll be selling in the 20s too in the not too distant future.
No, nonsequetor, you didn't hear a peep.
You didn't hear a peep from KB, only what someone else (Scott Smith) said he said.
You didn't hear a peep from JNJ. They have never mentioned any challenge or settlement with DECN
And you most certainly didn't hear a peep from one single business journal about this monumental case. And don't anyone say the press is not allowed to publish any news about it because it is sealed. Trump isn't president yet and we still have a free press. That JNJ has been challenged and beaten by some little pink sheet company and the settlement has been sealed would be a huge story that WSJ, NYT, IBD, Money, Forbes, Fortune, etc would be all over.
Instead of arguing with me, why hasn't anyone here contacted any of those publications and handed them the scoop of the year.
DECN seems to have broken below its ".35 base."
I am wondering (not predicting) if this is on the way back to .08.
The point I've been very clearly making is that it is impossible to determine the value of a company without knowing its finanacials.
The settlement is between two publicly traded companies, was made in a public court of law, and it makes absolutely no sense in the world that the settlement would be sealed.
The judge would not be concerned with saving JNJ's face as has been offered here as reason to seal the judgement.
A month or so ago, GILD lost a $200,000,000 settlement to Merck. It was reported in all the news media and GILD's stock went up a buck that day.
I am not trying to make a point. I have already made it repeatedly and i cannot spend the day repeating it more.
We have seen links to previous court rulings. How about a link to the very ruling that said the settlement must remain sealed?
um...ah...err...
JNJ is a publicly owned company required by the SEC to report anything material to its value to the public. DECN, of course, is only a pink sheet company and is not required to report anything
Others here have been good at finding court documents about this case. Where is the actual document showing the ruling that the settlement must not be publicly disclosed? Where is the link to that document?
I would think you would also not comprehend how the company can claim to have received a huge settlement from a law suit but the amount cannot be revealed, and it won't show up in its financials. What kind of financials would that be?
If it was so huge, it would be material to JNJ yet they have never uttered a peep about this which they would be required to do. Even just a little peep.
The lack of third party verification and the "secret" result makes me question the veracity of the entire thing.
No, you're right I don't, and neither do you. You don't know what the settlement was so how do you know it was monumental?
I few weeks ago, I had a healthy cough, but it went away.
The ruling had long been anticipated but apparently it wasn't of the proportions expected. The market shares my lack of understanding how monumental of a deal this was. From .60 to .35 since the undisclosed settlement.
That was something posted here--possibly by you--that will never happen. We know the settlement was no game changer.
I've not heard one of those "concerns" sequetor. Nobody's ever stated any of those things. What I have heard is that after the settlement, DECN would be at $8. DECN would hold the patent for their test strips and JNJ would have to pay them produce their own strips.
Instead, the settlement is all a big secret and DECN is clinging to .35.
It seems that way diarch. If there was this healthy settlement made, then I guess there isn't going to be a buyout. That's one less thing to be waiting for. And gambling on.
JNJ is involved in hundred million dollar law suits all the time, and they're never "sealed."
I believe JNJ hasn't bothered to release one single statement about this lawsuit because the settlement that DECN considers healthy, JNJ thinks of as petty cash.
This is just more smoke.
I suppose some federal rulings are sealed, but there is NO reason why a settlement between to publicly traded companies should remain sealed.
How is DECN going to file an HONEST financial report in the future if it cannot reflect the "healthy" (i.e. enormous) settlement it has received from JNJ?
This is fishy, and I for one don't buy it.
If you want to invest in companies that keeps its financials secret, be my guest.
Have a great day, Scott. I'm off to other concerns for today.
I personally cannot understand that. This was settled in a public court and the outcome should and would be public record.
Furthermore, let's say DECN received (in your dreams) $100 mil (that's million to all you Romans and Greeks out there). $100 million is not going to show up in their financials? DECN is going to "file" a quarterly statement (though not to the SEC) and not mention $100,000,000 cash it received and is now in their coffers? Some great, honest quarterly that's going to be.
That doesn't make sense.
Why hasn't this case been covered, or even mentioned, in ANY legitimate business journal? Yes, it was commented on in a Forbes blog (which was accompanied by a disclaimer from Forbes), but it has never been mentioned in the actual Forbes magazine, Fortune, Money, IBD, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, etc. etc., etc. I mean, even Info Wars or Drudge has never mentioned it. Johnson & Johnson has a patent taken away from it and given to company trading on the pinks, and they have to pay that company a "healthy" recompense as well, and not one single business journal finds it worthy of mention?
With all due respect, I remain skeptical. I would like to see some dependable third party verification that doesn't include posts by nom de plumes on a bulletin board, Diarch.
Those syllables don't compute. It was a trade. Somebody bought and somebody sold. It was a trade and it reflects on DECN neither positively nor negatively. DECN stock trades on the pink sheets, and that was a trade. Somebody bought some stock and somebody sold some stock. It was a buy for someone, but for someone else it was a sell. It can be characterized as either and be equally true, but there is no reason to do so, unless . . .
That's not an article. It's a quote within a press release.
I wonder who put up such a big block of shares for sale.
If you go to the front page of this thread, the page where you see a list of the messages, you will also see a list of people who signed on as mods. Look up Ihubs rules for who can be a moderator.
Only the moderators can change the I-box. There are five of them and all have posted on the board at least fairly recently, so it could be any one of them. Unless they speak up, we don't know.
I see the coordinated topic of conversation today has shifted from what a fantastic, unbeatable, number one marketer Retail Monster is to how unreliable Hotstocked is.
It takes team effort to get across that the potential of DECN offers unparalleled opportunity to small investors.
Rather than discuss the credibility of Hotstocked, why aren't we discussing the issue it raises about the potential of large DECN dilution. Is it even possible.? Of course it is.
All pink sheets that issue different forms of equity represent high risk of dilution, and DECN is certainly no different. That Hotstocked mentions it regularly is no reason to discount the possibility. Hotstocked, in my opinion, is as valid a source of feelings toward a stock as are all opinions on the internet. At least the author of Hotstocked writes under his real name and not under some pseudonym (like DrZem or ksuave).
I believe Alydyr stated that the Walton alleged to hold stock in DECN has no affiliation to Walmart.
Please post a link to the page where it mentions their other clients. I have looked and am unable to find.
And thank you so much for your new presence here and recent contributions.
Maybe maybe not. Why so enthusiastic for someone who hasn't yet delivered? We all hope he does a good job, but the proof will be in the pudding.
Mr. Connolly writes an excellent profile.
"Leading Dreamworks"?
Do you know who any of Retail Monster's other clients are, Hugh?
Please share with us what you learned, Viking. Who, besides DECN, are clients of Retail Monster?
You share so much information with us. Share that with us also.
Actually, their website is very unimpressive. They don't list their clients (if they have any). Under the link to "Experience", they show the logos of Disney, Walmart, Viacom, Levis, Dreamworks, and the like, but we know that they aren't actually doing the marketing for those companies. I suspect (and this is conjecture on my part) that the five principles shown under "Who" (all very attractive people by the way) have been employed by other advertising, pr or marketing companies that have done work for those companies.
It was stated here that they represent 24 clients, but not listing them is--well--kind of suspicious. I mean their client list IS their resume, and that's what they would want to be highlighting on their website.
Why is it that so much information about DECN and its dealings turn out to be so vague on closer examination?
I am not convinced that Retail Monster is the impressive, successful marketing firm that it is being hailed as.