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.
"This news that was released out AH yesterday should put some minds at ease to the goals and legitacy of this company."
Doubt it. The "news" (actually an attempt at damage limitation via a PR) confirmed that SPPH and Arella had basically been lying about being a Global company and about the timelines for commercialization of Met4.
It also showed that they were in default to one of their "partners", INSA, and that in their previous communications they had deliberately misled potential investors.
I'm sure I don't know why so many posters claim that last night's PR - which was surely an attempt to deflect the attention of SEC - was good news.
I do note, however, that many of those same posters have disclosure statements on their posts, and that others have disclosures elsewhere, for example on their profile page, often associated to IAB Media. To the latter group I would point out that they should be disclosing their conflict proactively each and every time they post on this message board.
"My .02 is the melanoma app is not going to do anything."
I agree with you 100% that such an app has no utility in the real world, and I agree with the reasons that you give.
But isn't there also the possibility it could actually do significant harm?
For example, by lulling people into a false sense of security, where because they have been re-assured that lesions that are visible to them are not malignant by the reults from the phone app, they skip the thorough medical that would have revealed the melanoma between the toes or under the hairline?
That's one of the reasons that I think that the phone app is a rather desperate and poorly though out gimmick.
Another is that I doubt that the resolution on a phone picture will be sufficient to distinguish between, say, BCC and melanoma - or even between a freckle and a tumor.
If HDVY's other technologies are all that they claim, I fail to see why they would make such a big thing of a rather dubious application.
Spencer Pharmaceutical’s PR from last night - a translation:
First off, this PR was not issued because SPPH’s CEO has had a sudden inspiration to communicate more with his shareholders. It was written either because they have already had contact with SEC, such as a Wells Notice, or because their lawyers have told them to expect such contact.
Perhaps not entirely coincidentally, I have recently alerted SEC to the scienters that Dr. Arella has committed, and I suspect I’m not the only one to have done so.
Once a company knows it is the target of an SEC investigation, it will usually try to retrospectively cover its tracks by issuing a PR that “clarifies” its previous announcements, that is tries to amend its lies while not admitting that it did lie in the first place.
Here’s a classic of its kind from another penny stock scam Green Energy Resources:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=51113013
Secondly, the timing is significant – one minute after market closing. SPPH knows full well that this disclosure that is essentially a shell operating on behalf of a small Canadian hedge fund (of which more later) will cause a significant sell-off of its equity, so it releases the PR when no one can react immediately by unloading. Some one was selling yesterday though – I wonder who that was?
Because he was challenged, Arella admits that the Boston “address” is in fact a shell, although he tries to maintain that there may be some work being done there:
“the management does not work out of this legal address”
thus implying that some SPPH staff do work out of that office. I’ll bet a dollar to a cent that nobody works out of 8 Faneuil Hall Marketplace other, just possibly, than a “receptionist” who answers the telephone on their behalf as a part-time role while doing the same thing for other shell companies.
As for the excuse that they need the US accommodation address for a US listing, why do they even need a US listing?
Both Canada and France, where they claim to have real operations, have perfectly good exchanges – perhaps the real reason is that the US Pink Sheets do not require any significant filings or disclosures, whereas the French and Canadian bourses do (again, see later). And of course, Pink Sheet shares are incredibly easy to manipulate, by, for example, pump and dump outfits.
I’m sure anybody visiting the University at Montreal will get a tour by perfectly pleasant people of some labs – lab rats (I know, because I used to be one) don’t get out much, and welcome human contact. That doesn’t mean that the $16,666 that each month SPPH pour lavishly (that’s irony for anyone who was wondering) into R&D at that facility will transform SPPH into the Global Powerhouse that their previous PRS have implied they already are.
$50,000 per quarter is a derisory amount, particularly when you note that SPPH must be spending much more than that on banner ads on iHub alone. Just about every iHub screen on every MB has a prominent banner advertising SPPH, in an obvious attempt to boost interest in buying its stock. Any company that spends more on pimping its stock than on R&D is almost always a scam.
That’s doubly true when they’re in default of their obligations to their other “partner”, INSA:
“However, it should be noted that the partnership with INSA requires a payment of approximately $150,000 every quarter and the company has not yet provided the said payment and the partnership is on hold until such time as the payment can be made”
When discussing the Regulatory Approval Process, the PR conveniently omits to mention that previously they had claimed that commercialization of Met4 would commence in June 2011 in the US, Africa and various EU markets, and instead concentrates only on Canada, where , where it claims it will apply for a Special Access Program (SAP) from Health Canada for the fast-track approval of the MET4 product.
Incidentally, this is what a SAP actually is:
"What is the Special Access Programme?
The Special Access Programme (SAP) allows practitioners to request access to drugs that are unavailable for sale in Canada. This access is limited to patients with serious or life-threatening conditions on a compassionate or emergency basis when conventional therapies have failed, are unsuitable, or are unavailable."
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/acces/drugs-drogues/sapfs_pasfd_2002-eng.php
In Health Canada's own words, you can see that the SAP has nothing to do with fast-track approval , in spite of Arella's claims. You can also see that there is literally no chance that yet another form of metformin will qualify in any way as providing something that any of the other modified release versions of metformin do not already offer.
What Arella wants you to believe is that Health Canada will approve a product – the combination of metformin with SPPH’s super duper drug delivery technology – without that technology ever having been tested in humans. In reality because of the risk that the technology might not work in humans – it might dump an overdose, or it might not release enough active, its human pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile is completely unknown – that’s simply never going to happen. Our friends north of the border may say “eh” a lot, but they’re not dumb enough to allow some fly-by-night start-up company to experiment on their citizens by approving a drug which has never been near a human being.
And nor will any other regulatory agency anywhere in the world allow a product which is a combination of an established product such as metformin in an untested delivery mechanism such as SPPH’s to be used without reasonably extensive human clinical studies.
Such studies will take more than a year from start to finish and will cost millions, maybe tens of millions of dollars.
Arella knows that, and he is deliberately trying to mislead you. Don’t let him.
“The company is currently being funded by a small independent fund located in Canada.”
You betcha. One of SPPH’s loyal longs (if there actually are any real longs) needs to ask Dr. Arella if his new found love of transparency will let him divulge who this “small independent fund” actually is.
Here’s my theory, borne out of substantial experience of similar penny stock scams.
SPPH’s sugar daddy is a hedge fund, which in exchange for the funding it provides SPPH, has received and regularly receives open, restricted, preference shares and warrnts of this stock. That would account for the huge percentage of the authorised share count which is not available to the float.
Now, in that position, hedge funds are good at doing one thing – “arbitraging” their position to make money for the owners of that hedge fund. They do this by both dumping the stock they own into the market, but also by going short on the stock, using their warrants etc. as guaranteed cover. Sometimes they do both of these things at the same time. It is an absolutely foolproof 100% guaranteed way of making money consistently, as long as you don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs by getting too greedy.
Interestingly, that kind of arbitrage, although immoral and unethical is entirely legal – and with a Pink Sheet stock, because of the absence of any significant reporting requirements, no shareholder even knows it is happening.
(What is illegal, and this is where Dr. Arella and Spencer Pharma have slipped up, is knowingly issuing false and misleading PRs such as their claim to be able to commercialize Met4 next year in a deliberate attempt to manipulate the share price in order to facilitate the dumping and the shorting. That’s why they’re now trying to back-pedal. (Too late, my friends, too late - no Safe Harbor statement covers intentional fraud.))
I guarantee you this is what is happening with Spencer Pharmaceutical stock, and that this is the rationale for the endless unjustifiable hype and unfounded optimism about this woeful pretense of a pharma start-up.
“The company has received an unsolicited all-cash offer on November 4, 2010 by a private equity fund. Although the offer is considerable, the company has opted to keep the information confidential until we receive further information from the purchasing party as well as retain an investment banking firm that can assist in said transaction. The company expects to release the information on the offer on or before November 12, 2010.”
There is a very high chance that Spencer Pharma will announce that they have decided not to accept this (entirely mythical) offer before the 12 November deadline. In any event they will never release the name or details of this supposed partner, simply because they do not exist.
No reputable private equity company would think about buying any of the stock of a start-up outfit with negligible research, that issues false and misleading PRs, defaults on its payments to partners, pays for banner ads that cost more than their R&D, has supporters who are unable to perform any real DD to justify why this company is anything other than a pump and dump shell, with many of those supporters disclosing that they are paid to promote SPPH.
Caveat emptor!
"However they have a chance for an "Accelerated approval"......Of course it would depend on the clinical results. IMO"
One off the many signals screaming SCAM!! about Spencer Pharmaceuticals is that there are precisely no clinical results for Met4 (or any other of their alleged pipeline products), and therefore it's simply inconceivable that they could be considered as having an acceptable filing, let alone fast track or accelerated approval.
SPPH know that were they even to submit an NDA to FDA they would get an RTF* within a heartbeat.
* RTF: Refusal to File: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM080561.pdf
And all their PRs and timelines imply they will gain approval for Met4 without testing in humans.
And that's just (factually and ethically) wrong.
"Doesn't this product actually have a "NEED" and actually quite a large need?
drug for glycemia control in patients with type 2 diabetes is Metformin"
bigtuna177, my point is precisely that there are already many versions of metformin available on the US (and Canadian and EU, and every other market).
The original metformin product was introduced in 1958. The patent is long expired, and many generic copies are available - including so-called modified release versions that will do exactly the same thing that it is claimed Met4 will do (that claim being made without the benefit of any human studies, and therefore without any proof that would satisy any regulatory agency anywhere in the world, let alone the FDA or EMA).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metformin
I say this to anybody considering investing or even trading in the biopharmaceutical penny stocks (or Big Board Pharma stocks for that matter:
If you don't understand the basics of pharmacology, the marketplace for pharmaceuticals or the regulatory process in the US and elsewhere, then you're going to get hosed by criminal enterprises who would just love to take your money.
Simple as that - and that's what the crooks behind the promotion of evidently fraudulent Spencer Pharmaceuticals are counting on.
Caveat emptor!
"It doesn't take 2 seconds to develop such technology so OBVIOUSLY it'll take time. "
From the link to SPPH's own propaganda that you kindly provided:
"Phase 2 March 2011 to June 2011
Additional Animal Testing of Met4
Fill Health Canada and FDA submissions for fast track approval request
Sign Distribution and or Licensing Agreement in the Middle East, North Africa and various European Union countries
Begin Commercialize the Met4 in the Middle East, North Africa and various European Union countries."
First off, there is no rationale under any existing protocol for FDA or Health Canada to grant a fast track approval process to (yet another) modified release version of metformin. This is already a well-satisfied market niche with no outstanding medical need that can be satisifed by Met4 and not by any other product.
Second, no pharmaceutical will ever be approved in the US, Canada or the EU without being tested in humans. Which, if you think about it, is quite sensible really, not to say quite re-assuring.
And yet these published timescales from Spencer Pharms do not allow for this very necessary step to take place.
It's unlikely they could even file an IND or the EU equivalent by June 2011, let alone begin commercializing Met4. Being optimistic, 2013 is probably the very earliest that could happen.
Nor does SPPH's balance sheet contain anything close to the millions of dollars that comparative clinical studies in humans will cost.
SPPH's "management" must know this, and yet they wilfully propagate deliberate misinformation. That's known as a scienter, and is highly illegal.
This promotion behind stock is clearly fraudulent, and I'm surprised that so many people seem happy to ignore that plain fact.
"It would be good to see some more information regarding this potential investment so as to silence those skeptical of such a deal."
Indeed it would.
I would be very interested to read any reasonable rationale beyond trader lingo about why any one thinks my analysis of SPPH as a pump and dump, with the innumerable penny stock promotion outfits behind it
(all compensated by millions of those restricted shares which form over 80% of the outstanding shares),
with the unverifiable and frankly unbelievable PRs (no outfit would make a private offer for all of SPPH's equity, with or without those restricted shares)
and with my previous posts demonstrating that approval of Met4 will not happen without human clinical studies, involving several million dollars and several years, and all the while subject to risk.
Do tell me where I'm wrong, please.
I'm all agog just waiting impatiently for the eloquent defenses of this most transparent of scams.
"The SEC part is hilarious, not gonna happen"
I wouldn't be so sure.
While the SEC tends to turn a blind eye to most of the goings on at the low rent end of Tin Pan Alley, where Spencer Pharmaceuticals, SPPH, hangs out, they occasionally like to make an example pour encourager les autres. Look at well-known long-running scam GRGR which also poured out worthless PR after worthless PR, confident in the knowledge that SEC didn't go after two-bit grifters.
Until SEC did indeed go after the two-bit grifter running GRGR.
A number of SPPH's PRs and other communications, not least the Met4 timelines, are clearly scienters.
SEC could suspend SPPH tomorrow if they had the will and the inclination - they certainly have the grounds.
"starting to wake up here, need to get this over 30 by lunch"
Why, do you have some (more) shares to divest?
As I think I've already said, only day traders with an exquisite sense of timing and more than their fair share of luck (and like Lake Woebegon's children, all of whom are above average, I've never ever met any other kind of day trader)will make money on this stock.
Anybody who buys and holds will inevitably lose the vast majority of their "investment", indeed all of it if they chase it down to the inevitable conclusion of bankruptcy or suspension by the SEC, whichever comes first.
"We have a fair share structure here"
Fair for who?
The penny stock promoters and other agents and insiders who own or have access to the more than 200 million shares that aren't in the float?
Sure as heck it isn't fair to the Mom and Pop investors who might be gulled into buying this worthless shell, which is manifestly obviously a pump and dump operation.
SPPH:
IAB Media Inc. has received 24,000,000 restricted shares from Spencer Pharmaceutical Inc. on 2009-12-16
The agreement was amended on 2010-10-07 to reduce the number of restricted shares as compensation to 4,000,000 and the 20,000,000 remaining shares were returned to the SPPH treasury.
Investor Bill posts a disclaimer about his compensation:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/IRP.aspx?Userid=216619
There's a significant number of those restricted shares that aren't available to the float. In fact this one penny stock promotion company alone has access to shares representing nearly 10% of the float even after having 20 million (!) taken away .
Talk about a conflict of interest! And there's a dozen more penny stock promotion companies receiving similar compensation for unsubstantiated hyping of SPPH all over the MBs
And I've yet to see any post containing any reasoned argument why SPPH is not grossly overvalued, particularly as it appears to be a transparent P&D operation.
"At .25 right now, way undervalued."
Why would you say that?
As another poster pointed out yesterday, the only asset they have is the patent, valued at $108,000, and even that is outweighed by their liabilities.
I myself have highlighted that the timescales and prospects SPPH presents for Met4 are delberately and obviously misleading.
On that basis, this company, Spencer Pharmaceuticals is literally worthless.
Caveat emptor!
"Your figures are actually just plain wrong."
My bad. The float is as you describe it.
Heavens knows who owns the rights to all those authorised shares that aren't in the float, but I suspect the answer would lead us to the folk behind the pump 'n dump operation that SPPH undoubtedly is.
"Not a bad float here !!
Float 45,429,759 a/o Feb 25, 2010 [/b"
Your figures are actually just plain wrong.
SPPH has a float of 480 million shares and currently there are 258 million outstanding shares.
Given that Spencer Pharmaceuticals has no assets to speak of, issues vapor PRs that are unverifiable and has published an entirely fictional timeline for Met4, this would suggest that the current pps is actually much higher than it deserves to be.
In other words, this is a pump and dump operation.
Caveat emptor!
"I am sure when another PR hits, SPPH is going to ramp up again."
Quite possibly you are right - that's the nature of pump and dump operations.
And there is no longer even the slightest scintilla of doubt in my mind that Spencer Pharmaceuticals is a pump and dump operation.
PRs that cannot be verified, a business plan for Met4 which is pure fiction, as can be verified by anybody with the slightest knowledge of the biopharmaceutical business, (or indeed passing familiarity with FDA or EMA requirements), financials that stink, and a flurry of paid penny stock promoters, not to mention the complete absence of any critical DD beyond "this is wonderful, it's going to da moon!"
Only day traders with an exquisite sense of timing and more than their fair share of luck (apparently the only type of day trader that exists) will make money on SPPH.
In the longer term, anyone buying and holding SPPH will lose 100% of their "investment". I guarantee it.
"Radar this one, news expected this week."
I certainly imagine that there may be more unverifiable PRs issued by SPPH, and more dodgy penny stock promoters being paid to promote the stock to gullible investors.
However, given that SPPH's "management" are simply deliberately misleading about the prospects for Met4, which will need human studies before commercialization, and even then has no guarantee of any kind of success, I suspect that in the longer term this stock is headed in only one direction.
The big question is whether the P&D will succeed, or whether for once SEC will get here in time.
"Are you a shareholder yourself?"
No. I don't buy shares of companies whose "managements" refuse to tell their shareholders what they own and don't own, or that hire penny stock promoters to post on MBs like this one.
I like my money too much to throw it away in such a fashion.
"Would you like an update every time a member of management takes a leak?"
Certainly not - that would be presumptuous of me, and scarcely germane to the LLEG pps either.
I am curious, hwoever, as to the nature of the deal LLEG's management have done with their NewCo partners, and what assets remain in the shareholders' name, and how much cash has or will accrued/accrue to the shareholders as a result of the Berlin deal.
I also feel that no responsible "management" makes a super duper double top secret deal that means that their shareholders have to rely on faith to believe they still own anything of value. In Pink Sheet Land, faith is a commodity which is easily and indeed habitually abused.
So the information I seek is much more relevant than urinary frequency, but it would seem, much, much more secret too.
"also strong like bull..."
LLEG - secretive management - also smells like bull.
"Phase 2 - March 2011 to June 2011
• Additional Animal Testing of Met4
• Fill Health Canada and FDA submissions for fast track approval request
• Sign Distribution and or Licensing Agreement in the Middle East, North Africa and various European Union countries
• Begin Commercialize the Met4 in the Middle East, North Africa and various European Union countries."
Just as an FYI, it will be impossible to gain FDA or EMA (the European equivalent of FDA) approval for human use of Met 4 without one of two things:
Either a bioequivalence study in humans showing that the product is identical to an existing form of metformin - the downside of this approach is it will take at least a year, followed by the actual submission itself, and that by definition it would position Met 4 as a generic metformin, and there's plenty of those already, all competing on price.
Or a full blown clinical study (or possibly two), again in humans, showing clinical benefits versus placebo for Met 4. This will involve filing an IND, conducting a very expensive clinical trial (or two), hoping the results are positive (by no means a slam dunk), and then filing an NDA and hoping for approval.
The latter would cost tens of millions of dollars and take at least two years, more likely three before any product could be on the market.
Incidentally, there is absolutely no reason FDA or any other regulatory agency would fast track a Met4 application. None at all.
So, the timelines given for FDA and EU submission, as well as the likely dates for commercialization are just plain wrong, in the sense of being hopelssly optimistic.
And I can't believe the company's "management" don't already know that.
Now I'm 99.2% sure that Spencer Pharmaceuticals is a scam.
"i was told by someone at the company that they used a business center to have a legal address in the USA."
A Francophone company apparently with operations in Canada and France, and what's politely called an "accomodation address" in the US (conveniently close to the NE biotech hub, Boston) yet quoted on the US Pink Sheets with 258.4 million shares outstanding.
Wonder why they want a PK quote, let alone a US quote at all?
Incidentally I know of one confirmed penny stock scam that has a Nobel Laureate on its Scientific Advisory Board,and another (not so coincidentally co-located with the former) that received a $1 million pork barrel grant "to accelerate" research from the Federal Government, courtesy of their local Congresswoman, Louise Slaughter.
Academic connections and seemingly legitimate research are common fig leaves for penny biotech scams to wear.
The big question about Spencer Pharmaceutical is why the endless stream of unverifiable PRs, why the Pink Sheet listing, why the huge outstanding float and why the address of convenience?
Answers on a postcard to the SEC, please.
"has anyone checked this place out to make sure it's legit and not just a PO Box?"
Why, Spencer Pharmaceutical's address:
8 Faneuil Hall Marketplace
3rd Floor
Boston, MA 02109
is also the home of such fine institutions as Studentmarket.com Inc, Tasty Boston Singles Dining Network, Chrisicos Interiors, LLC, Kitchen Style, Inc., Moon2 Entertainment, Maids Express - Boston Maid Service, Attorney Search Consultants, and many others.
Not to mention Omni/Office Plus, which could be an office supplies store, or even one of these places that rents addresses to fly-by-night businesses to make them look good.
Tom, I'd be interested to know what you find when you visit.
One thing for sure is that the Faneuil Hall Marketplace offices don't look anything like any of the images shown on the website or the Corporate video. In fairness it doesn't actually state that those gleaming research edifices are the offices and labs of SPPH, it just implies it heavily.
Now I'm 99.1% sure Spencer Pharmaceuticals is a scam.
"A little patience with this one could prove to be very beneficial!"
Beneficial, that is, for the folk who want to find long-term holders while they day trade the inevitable pumps and dumps basede on bogus and unverifiable PRs.
Time for a refresher from the SEC:
"Pump&Dump.con:
Tips for Avoiding Stock Scams
on the Internet
One of the most common Internet frauds involves the classic "pump and dump" scheme. Here's how it works: A company's web site may feature a glowing press release about its financial health or some new product or innovation. Newsletters that purport to offer unbiased recommendations may suddenly tout the company as the latest "hot" stock. Messages in chat rooms and bulletin board postings may urge you to buy the stock quickly or to sell before the price goes down. Or you may even hear the company mentioned by a radio or TV analyst.
Unwitting investors then purchase the stock in droves, creating high demand and pumping up the price. But when the fraudsters behind the scheme sell their shares at the peak and stop hyping the stock, the price plummets, and investors lose their money.
Fraudsters frequently use this ploy with small, thinly traded companies because it's easier to manipulate a stock when there's little or no information available about the company. To steer clear of potential scams, always investigate before you invest:
Consider the Source
When you see an offer on the Internet, assume it is a scam, until you can prove through your own research that it is legitimate. And remember that the people touting the stock may well be insiders of the company or paid promoters who stand to profit handsomely if you trade.
Find Out Where the Stock Trades
Many of the smallest and most thinly traded stocks cannot meet the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Stock Market or a national exchange, such as the New York Stock Exchange. Instead they trade in the "over-the-counter" market and are quoted on OTC systems, such as the OTC Bulletin Board or the Pink Sheets. Stocks that trade in the OTC market are generally among the most risky and most susceptible to manipulation.
Independently Verify Claims
It's easy for a company or its promoters to make grandiose claims about new product developments, lucrative contracts, or the company's financial health. But before you invest, make sure you've independently verified those claims.
Research the Opportunity
Always ask for — and carefully read — the prospectus or current financial statements. Check the SEC's EDGAR database to see whether the investment is registered. Some smaller companies don't have to register their securities offerings with the SEC, so always check with your state securities regulator, too.
Watch Out for High-Pressure Pitches
Beware of promoters who pressure you to buy before you have a chance to think about and fully investigate the so-called "opportunity." Don't fall for the line that you'll lose out on a "once-in-a-lifetime" chance to make big money if you don't act quickly.
Always Be Skeptical
Whenever someone you don't know offers you a hot stock tip, ask yourself: Why me? Why is this stranger giving me this tip? How might he or she benefit if I trade?
For more information on how to use the Internet to invest wisely and avoid fraud, be sure to visit our Internet and Online Trading web page. There you'll find a vast array of tips, including Internet Fraud: How to Avoid Internet Investment Scams.
www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/pump.htm"
http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/pump.htm
"We all would like a Green finish but next week outlook is positive."
For the unfortunate sufferers of Pennystockholm Syndrome, next week is like tomorrow.
And you know what they say about tomorrow - it never comes. It's always tomorrow, never today.
"On Monday, the company announced that it had formed an agreement with National Pharmaceutical Corp."
That would be National Pharmaceutical Corporation, the Pink Sheet company with a market cap of $38 million (and that's probably $37.9 million more than it's really worth).
The pink sheets and OB markets are littered with PRs announcing LoIs and other agreements between companies that find it mutually convenient to conspire to defraud their "investors". It is highly unlikely that Spencer Pharmaceuticals is the sole exception, particularly considering their other PRs are also unverifiable by any independent third party.
I'm 99% convinced these guys behind SPPH are running a scam operation, and that they are supported on the message boards by the usual pump 'n dump crew using a variety of aliases.
Caveat emptor!
Oh, look, here's that post that disappeared then got re-instated:
sunspotter Share Friday, November 05, 2010 12:30:37 PM
Re: investorBill1979 post# 1689 Post # of 1744
"cash buyout
this really is HUGE news.
Inquiring minds want to know
WHOthis private enterprise is
that's taking so much interest
in Spencer Pharmaceuticals.
Hopefully they'll spill the beans soon ;)"
Actually this "inquiring mind" wants to know why SPPH puts out an unverifiable PR which is almost certainly at best misleading and in all probability a fraudulent scienter.
PS Sunspotter's Fifteenth Law of probable penny biopharmaceutical stock frauds says:
Any stock actively promoted by anybody advertising his or her self-proclaimed position as a Priest, Pastor, Rabbi, Imam or other religious community letter has a 96.3% chance of being a fraudulent enterprise.
Here is part of the empirical underpinning for that particular axiom:
http://www.pitch.com/content/printVersion/1563663/
Hurrah for the First Amendment!
"it was a very successful week with PRs and volume!"
Successful for whom, I wonder? I suspect only for day traders with an exquisite sense of timing and more than their fair share of luck. And any insiders who might benefit from the old classic pump 'n dump, of course.
Everything about this company, from its vapor PRs, which cannot be independently verified, through to the way it is promoted on message boards such as this, not to mention its spurious and bogus claims about its technology and its claims to be a Global company when it is clearly nothing of the sort, screams SCAM.
Caveat emptor!
"Showing nice support at these levels, excellent buy opportunity."
Doubt it. The stock itself is clearly at best based on unfounded optimism, more probably a total scam.
It's conceivable that day traders with an exquisite sense of timing and more than their fair share of luck could turn a profit on this stock* but anybody viewing SPPH as a buy and hold should look carefully, talk to a trusted adviser, look at the history of similar biopharmaceutical start-up penny stocks claiming a Global platform and releasing a string of unverifiable PRs, then go somewhere else.
* Sunspotter's Thirty-third Law (a variant of the Lake Woebegon Effect: " where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average,") states that 98% of all day traders encountered will have a better than average trading record, and in fact 88% of them will never have recorded a loss on any stock which they have speculated upon. The fact that this is statistically and logically impossible is clearly not germane to this discussion.
"cash buyout
this really is HUGE news.
Inquiring minds want to know
WHOthis private enterprise is
that's taking so much interest
in Spencer Pharmaceuticals.
Hopefully they'll spill the beans soon ;)"
Actually this "inquiring mind" wants to know why SPPH puts out an unverifiable PR which is almost certainly at best misleading and in all probability a fraudulent scienter.
PS Sunspotter's Fifteenth Law of probable penny biopharmaceutical stock frauds says:
Any stock actively promoted by anybody advertising his or her self-proclaimed position as a Priest, Pastor, Rabbi, Imam or other religious community letter has a 96.3% chance of being a fraudulent enterprise.
Here is part of the empirical underpinning for that particular axiom:
http://www.pitch.com/content/printVersion/1563663/
"With the news that came out yesterday,it gives a sense that there is an investor that wants this company pretty bad, and shareholder value will benefit from it."
An alternate, and in my view more probable, explanation is that it gives a sense of just what scienters this company's "management" are prepared to commit in order to goose the pps.
The real question is, why do they want to goose the pps by issuing bogus PRs in the first place?
Answers, please, on a postcard addressed to the SEC.
"Refresh my memory: how much $$ did Pfizer advance to HDVY?"
It was a super duper top-secret deal (see below), so only your employee, Dr. Barnhill, his associates and Pfizer know, and as far as I know they're not telling.
"HEALTH DISCOVERY CORPORATION ANNOUNCES
WORLDWIDE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH PFIZER
SAVANNAH, GA, December 11, 2006 – Health Discovery Corporation (“HDC”) (OTC BB: HDVY - News) announced today that it has executed a license agreement with Pfizer Inc. (NYSE:PFE – News). Under the terms of the agreement, Pfizer may access HDC’s pattern recognition technology for use in its worldwide research and development activities. The license includes HDC’s Support Vector Machine (“SVM”), Fractal Genomic Modeling (“FGM”), and related methods for data analysis. Financial terms of this agreement were not disclosed.
"I believe this licensing agreement represents a significant step for HDC towards validating the scientific legitimacy and commercial viability of our patented SVM and FGM technologies,” said Stephen D. Barnhill, M.D., HDC’s Chairman and CEO. “This license marks our third deal in just the past four months and gives us confidence that our strategic plan is on track.”
“In my opinion, HDC’s pattern recognition technology can be an important tool for the discovery of new drug targets such as proteins, genes, or other molecules that a drug is intended to affect,” commented Dr. Herbert A. Fritsche, Jr., Professor of Laboratory Medicine at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and Chairman of HDC’s Science Board. “Our technology might also be helpful in possible identification of new biomarkers to assess both efficacy and toxic responses to new drugs. As medicine becomes increasingly personalized, discoveries of this nature could facilitate the development of new treatments for diseases.” ...."
PS The astute reader will note that the good Dr. Fritsche was eagerly positioning himself for future HDVY employment even back then. Good job all the studies he did in his labs for HDVY turned out so positively, or goodness knows how he would have been able to feather his retirement nest.
"Maybe try emailing Quest and Abbott with your query.... "
And years ago I could have replaced Abbott by Pfizer, and so on and so forth. And the only thing that has changed materially is the pps, and not in a positive way.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
"I have every confidence that everyone from Dr. Barnhill to Dr. Guyon to the new assistant will get as much as they can get! "
So do I. The various filings detailing Dr. Barnhill's extraordinary remuneration over the past few years show you that he will indeed take as much as he can get, while distributing large sums of shareholders' money to employees past and present.
For some reason, however, none of these large amounts of cash ever seem to trickle down to the people who actually own the company (and therefore the money). That would be the retail shareholders, of course.
Funny thing, that. Wonder why it's turned out that way for the past few years?
I also wonder why anyone would think the next ten years would be any different.
I make a study of likely scam stocks, and my proprietary sunspotter-scam-o-meter tells me there's a 99.6% chance that Spencer Pharmaceuticals is an operation designed to take money from the gullible (anyone naive enough to believe any of their vapor PRs- none of which, conveniently enough, can be independently verified), and give it to a shady group of insiders.
Mind you, a minimal application of common sense would tell you exactly the same thing.
The only real question is whether or not this is an independently operated scam, or whether it is associated with organised crime.
Answers on a postcard, please, to SEC.
Caveat emptor!!
"With FASC now poised on the brink of spectacular success(es) - one after another after another after another, etc etc etc ad infinitum - and indeed poised to become the Cisco of this decade, the only question any investor need ask of themself is not "Do I buy FASC ?" but rather "How do I buy ALL the FASC I can ?"; followed by "What do I sell now so I can buy even more FASC ?"
A question for the Board Moderator who posted the following rules in the FASC iBox:
"Board Rules: No foul language, personal attacks, "to da moon" pumping or heavy-handed bashing."
In the context of FASC, exactly what constitutes "to da moon" pumping?
I'd be grateful for clarification on this. TIA.
"Ya know, maybe it's just you? I mean, you can be slightly annoying at times - and of course I mean that in the best possible way."
I can see how company apologists would be annoyed by someone who points out that refusing to supply the information described is known as gagging.
"Even the mere mention that this is a scam shows a profound lack of DD, critical thinking skills or honesty."
Indeed I can also see that those devoid of any spark of the Scientific Method would wish to forbid the "mere mention" of the fact that there is every possibility that HDVY is in fact a scam run for the benefit of Dr,. Barnhill and a few insiders.
Poor tryntomakeamil could have benefitted from a more critical appraisal of the this stock and its prospects before he bought based on all the favorable predictions back in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 - well, you get the picture.
"Ya know", I myself an annoyed by the use of fake patois, which seems to be a trait of stock promoters everywhere. Can't think why.
If, as Hurtheboys says, the stock is not gagged and he has been supplied with the outstanding shares information, then why doesn't he, or indeed any other poster, post it here for all to see?
I can only think of one reason, and that would be that in fact Accipter Q is right, and the stock is gagged. That would be consistent with many other warning signs about HDVY.
"Nice to see an above board company here."
It would be, wouldn't it?
Unfortunately the combination of a "management" that refuses to tell its owners (that would be you, the shareholders) exactly what they own and don't own, via their super-duper top double secret with their Newco partners, using a completely bogus excuse about confidentiality, coupled with paid penny stock promoters as well as some of the most egregious "to da moon, great news around the corner" promoting by apparently unpaid posters, all point to a company that is several levels under the aforesaid board.
"Does this finally provide Clarient with the resources to start marketing the test? "
Glass half empty view (from someone with experience from both sides of the acquisition fence):
For the next few months everyone in Clarient will be ensuring they have the best chance of continued employment, which contrary to what you might fondly imagine, means greasing up internally to all and sundry and playing politics like crazy. The no-hopers will already have given up on any "customer-facing" (to use the horrid lingo of the day) activities, and the really good Clarient guys will be looking for another job already. So anybody involved in the (to them) already tiny HDVY projects now has another focus entirely.
As for the GE folks, who will in the main be the victors and sweep into occupy most of the key Clarient positions, firstly they probably won't find details of the HDVY deals tucked away there in the bottom drawer along with the stale subs and dubious magazines for months to come, and when they do finally stumble across them, they'll simply sigh and say:
"Sheesh, those Clarient guys knew nothing. No wonder we had to come and clear up after them. Now, where's my lunch?"
The other possibility is that HDVY have a "change of control" clause in their (top-secret) agreement and can reclaim the rights to their tests. Whether they would or should choose to do so is a different matter altogether.
"Please delete paid pumpers immediately. Thanks!"
While I agree that the presence of paid stock promoters is rarely indicative of a favorable prognosis for a stock, nevertheless if full disclosure is made, then folk can make their own judgement, including that it's a bad sign, as you comment.
So I have no issue with those posts remaining. The ones you want to worry about are the 99% to which rebelgirl referred, which appear to be from genuine longs but are actually from paid promoters or from other insiders for example, company employees or agents, or warrant holders/ preference share owners playing both ends of a repeated P&D by shorting with guaranteed cover. (The polite term is arbitrage. In reality it's (entirely legal) theft.)
And sadly those folk will never disclose and SEC will catch up with only a miniscule percentage of these offenders.
Hence the perennial warning to would-be buyers of penny stocks - caveat emptor!
"I hope he learns about the company before continuing."
Pawsy, perhaps you could help educate me.
What percentage of the new enterprise in Berlin will LLEG's existing retail shareholders own when the deal is finally consumated, or do they own now even?
What financial consideration has LLEG as a company received from its partners in Newco in return for the assets it put into the pool?
TIA for this information.