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.
Well people like Fishy have been calling for this explosion to happen for a longggg time. And then when it never happens, they just push back when it is going to happen.
Oh, ok. So now its "just wait till May" for the huge pop. Got it!
Third or fourth week of April.
We were told by the "knowledgeable" posters (the "TA" experts) that it would start raining money here by the third or fourth week of April. And that volume would explode and there would be buying hand over fist after 967 was announced. Even trade near $10.
When does all of this start?
Because, it is a "sign" from "someone" who knows "something". "They" are flashing a signal that we should all be buying AMRN because it is about to explode! This is a good Samaritan signaling us in a legal way that we would definitely notice. It is like aliens flashing us signals from their planet.
Don't you know this already? Surprised you didn't post this theory as it fits with your usual mindset. If may even be JT himself who is telling us through 1 share trades that REDUCE-IT is gonna rock the world!
You obviously have not understood my arguments and opinions on this issue.
By the way, in your scenario, I think you would agree that the rate of death would eventually diverge given the difference in events. I think you would agree that it takes time for less events to translate into less deaths. So hence, by letting the trial run longer, the higher chance of getting that divergence. And would that not be a juicy divergence to eventually get?? By stopping the trial early you give up that potential opportunity.
Just my opinion man. It is only an extra 1-2 years to finish the trial off. Why take a major risk stopping early and opening up a door for the FDA to slam shut? Not to mention that science and humanity benefits more from the trial running to completion. And with no change in death rate, there is no ethical concerns with running it to completion.
No reason to stop it early unless death rate differs. None whatsoever. For traders to make a quick buck doesn't override the above reasons to let it run.
Correct...meant that it went below $4. But just because CHMA imploded still does not explain why they would sell all of their AMRN on the heels of apparently $40+ a share within months. But yes, I agree they just showed they aren't that smart.
And it was more the combination of Abingworth, Stonepine, AND Camber ALL selling completely out that raises big eyebrows. Just one is whatever...but all three is pretty inexplicable.
That is what I am saying. You want the best possible standing with the FDA when they come along to scrutinize the trial. Stopping it early could open the door for problems.
CHMA - JT's golden touch?
Chiasma (CHMA)was the bio that John Thero become a board member last year. This is also the stock that Abingworth bought a huge amount of after completely selling out of AMRN. CHMA was like 25% of Abingworth's portfolio as of 12/31/2015! And they owned over 8% of the company. Well, yesterday the stock got an approval denial and the stock went from $10 to below $3. It is down over 80% in the last 6 months.
I wonder if JT becoming a board member had anything to do with Abingworth taking a big stake in it. Abingworth is well connected to AMRN and it's people. Interesting coincidence. But good to see them both get creamed. AMRN is down a lot since they sold out as well, but not near as much as CHMA. And they bought a whole lot more of CHMA than they had in AMRN. So this move was a severe, costly mistake for Abingworth.
And there is a lot of discretion with an interim stop. And it only makes sense to stop the trial if death rate is improved with Vascepa.
I mentioned this months ago. Trial would only be stopped if number of deaths is significantly different between arms.
What about his theory that AMRN and the FDA would throw the DMC to the side and secretly look at Reduce-It data together. Or that the 1A settlement talks were "Cherry related". Or that the last 1A talk deadline was so AMRN could see at 2pm that day whether they were getting NCE then determine how they were going to proceed (this includes 15 seconds to sign a joint letter, all done after 2pm on a Friday).
lol.
When does the run to $2 start?
Whoa, wait. You are on record saying AMRN at some point tomorrow will be up over 13%?
You obviously missed completely the point. The discussion wasn't about stock sales. It is about their annual compensation shown in the proxy statement for 2014. Not 2012. This is the amount of money they are receiving for doing their job (a very poor one at that).
The stock sales are a different matter, although related because they only have so much stock to sell because it was handed to them for free.
These people make huge money no matter what happens. Stock goes up, cha ching. Stock goes down, cha ching. Some meaningless court wins? Cha ching. Cha ching all the time, every time. And you are left with $1.75 a share and loving every second of it. Even defending them. That is called the Stockholm Syndrome. And again, if things don't work out, they slither away and live the high life from accomplishing nothing and you lose all your money. They just gotta keep the hope alive and milk this for as many years as they can. And if things do work out, great? If not, oh well, they are still rich beyond comprehension. Pretty pretty pretty good gig if you ask me.
But hey...."well if things work out in the future then they will be worth all that money" is surely a great way to pay executives. If only actual accomplishments meant something as far as how much executives are paid...what an idea.
And if it doesn't work out? Then they slither away with their millions while you are left high and dry.
You don't pay people based on potential future results. You pay them based on actual accomplishments.
No, there isn't HOPE on here. There are hard and fast beliefs that it will be stopped with high degree of certainty and that AMRN will trade at a bare minimum of $40 a share. Some "hope". That is hilarious.
But hey, I guess if the continued non-buying of the investment community, with billions and billions of dollars at their disposal and all the resources in the world to do research is "meaningless", but the opinions of a handful of retail stockholders on a message board is golden, then best of luck to you in the future.
You clearly do not understand markets and how all of this works. Obviously the concept of no one whatsoever besides people on this MESSAGE BOARD believing in an interim stop has flown over your head. That is a huge piece of information that you choose to ignore because it doesn't fit your narrative of 100% pumping and shielding yourself from anything that doesn't confirm to your view that interim will be stopped and AMRN will be $40-$100 within days of the announcement.
And by the way, if you want to see what a REAL recovery looks like in a stock, look at DDD. Traded at a low of $6.00 in January. Right now the stock is trading at $19.22. That is a recovery. AMRN going from $1.24 to $1.75 isn't exactly anything to write home about as many bios have recovered easily that much or more.
Interesting cherry picking of your time frame to insinuate that AMRN is somehow a strong stock.
Pretty sure we were already told that the 3rd/4th week of April it will start raining money.
Also FishyFingers has stated more than once he expects a run to near $10 before the interim announcement is made.
Interesting in knowing what tutes exactly intrigue you?
It is losing money mainly because of REDUCE-IT. Once REDUCE-IT is over, they should be able to at least be break even. Of course if REDUCE-IT fails it remains to be seen what will happen to scripts and if Vascepa will have ANY value to anyone. Of course with mountains of debt and no money "break even" doesn't do much. And by the time REDUCE-IT is over lord knows how many shares will be outstanding given the need for major further financing.
I agree a small piece of REDUCE-IT is priced in. This company isn't worth $1.60 as it stands (ignoring REDUCE-IT). The quandry is that no REDUCE-IT is much better than a failed REDUCE-IT. So to value this as a standalone is tough to come up with.
And as far as management having no blame for the PPS, and only the FDA is to cause, I strongly disagree. Management has opportunity after opportunity to produce something of VALUE, and has continually failed to deliver time and time again:
-Horrible loan at $12 instead of dilution
-No plan whatsoever for negative ADCOM
-NCE court win with no follow through and still no NCE nearly a year later
-Failed 1A negotiations. Another HUGE missed opportunity
-Inability to sign major partner to increase scripts or run trials for other indications
-Inability to properly market Vascepa after 1A win
-Overall lackluster script growth and lack of enthusiasm for the product (<20% market share well over 3 years after launch is PATHETIC at best)
-Still major insurance barriers and challenges
-Lack of ability to attract and retain major institutional investors
All of these missed opportunities has forced major dilution at atrocious levels. Management has not shown an ability to capitalize on ANYTHING.
You correctly understood the message.
However, fair value is what someone will pay for the shares. Undervalued can be a relative term because if is only "undervalued" if at some point in the future people decide to value it more fairly. You can say it is undervalued until the cows come home, but if it never ever trades to that "fair value", then who cares? Is it really undervalued? The fact that the market has discounted REDUCE-IT to close to nothing speaks volumes about their view of this company and it's management. If it is trading at a severe discount now, no reason it won't also trade at a severe discount later. Unless something changes. That is what is needed...something has to change. Company needs new energy and leadership to get the Street back on board. Right now this is a stale, boring story with incompetent leaders and a brutal balance sheet that needs to be addressed. And a management team that already burned many bridges. This is the recipe for sub $300m market cap for a drug that some posters honestly say could be the highest selling drug ever. That takes special talent.
The market has not made a decision regarding REDUCE-IT. Right now it is trading as if REDUCE-IT does not exist. Which to me would lean more to that they are discounting any possibility of successful results. But the market really isn't saying anything either way. AMRN is trading on it's current bad balance sheet and revenue. If REDUCE-IT were to disappear tomorrow, where would the AMRN stock go? Probably not much from where it is right now.
The market does not care about REDUCE-IT at the moment given the more urgent issues, IE financing.
Result of GIA strikes again!
We have people on this board who literally say the PPS is irrelevant and we shouldn't care. One prominent poster even went so far as to say: "PPS sucks, but so friggin what?"
These are investors in this stock saying this stuff. And I get attacked for "bashing" for mentioning the truth and why the stock absolutely SUCKS. Meanwhile people who are lauded on this board say the PPS sucks who cares and they are the respected ones.
Odd odd world on this board.
JT did not buy shares! Good grief. The Form 4's come out every quarter as their stock awards vest. Every quarter he gets tens of thousands of free shares that become vested.
lol..surely you are more knowledgeable than this? Does someone seriously have to explain to you that JT didn't buy shares?
Nope. If 967 happened in December if would have showed up in the database in 2016. So no lie there whatsoever. Again you are having major problems distinguishing between the event actually happening and when it is reported into the database. You just keep saying "occur" without clarifying what you mean by "occur". Occur to JT most likely means when it shows up as an event in their database. The delay between the two events (occurring and being reported) could be up to 2 months (maybe even longer). Of course JT hasn't clarified what "occur" means to him so again we are left having to just hypothesize. But 967 surely could have occurred in December. If you actually read my previous posts you would see my thought was that mid January to early February was the time frame for it. I said December was possible. Of course everyone globs on to that and ignores my late January to early February comment.
Correct. I am sure it is part of the protocol for interim analysis. The DMC isn't choosing on the fly to check secondary endpoints because "they want to". Ha...how ridiculous, the thought that things are just made up on the fly as to what to check.
Also consider that the database may currently have MORE than 967 events in it at this moment (how many more though?). This would make sense they would start analysis with more than 967 in case some events are "thrown out" or what not. I had brought this up as an issue weeks ago.
So if right now there are more than 967 events, then again it would make sense that 967 itself did happen some time ago (assuming most if not all events are in fact not thrown out). So this is further evidence we need to go back farther than many on here are thinking. It wouldn't shock me if the 967th event happened as far back as December. It would be good to know how many events are currently in the database to give more of a clue of how far to go back.
Bottom line: there is not enough information to make any accurate predictions of efficacy. The difference between 967 happening on Jan 1 or March 1 makes a huge difference to these "estimates". So nothing useful can be gleaned from simpleton estimates.
I think it happened well before late February. I think mid-January to early February is more realistic. Of course we don't know for sure. I would definitely agree that no 967 date after the end of February should be considered as realistic. Mid-February might be an OK estimate to use, but February 1 seems the most conservative and on par with how things work.
Well then they shouldn't come on here with a pompous attitude about how smart they are on technical analysis and how they know so much better than you. Then post crazy predictions. And that is just supposed to go unchecked? Oh wait, it is the AMRN board, so yes, wild pumping is accepted and lauded. Truth and being right are thrown to the wind. ALl that matters is that people pump, and pump as hard as they can.
Ohhhh ok. The run to above $1.70 will just happen later today. Gotcha.
Thanks!
"I believe we will see the confirmation on Friday. Again, all dependent on the volume and the close. What im looking for is high volume and a close above $1.70."
FF strikes again!
"PPS sucks, but so friggin what?".
WOW WOW WOW.
Interesting post considering this recent gem:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121554556
"The announcement of 967 will be enough to trigger your stoploss to cover (as well as your boss's hedge fund shorts). This will set off a painful (for you) chain reaction of price appreciation. Covering will lead to bargain buying. Hedge funds will move and further drive it up. Option activity will add juice."
What happened to enrollment completion by end of year 2015?
You can't trust anything this company says. It is all ambiguous and unreliable. And people wonder why no one wants to invest in this company. Cause this company is shady as hell.
Now the next month or two is gonna be constant debate of whether "967 has happened or not".
Just more ambiguity and uncertainty.
Isn't it great?