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.
ADTM as well....probably a few others if I do a lit search.
Licensing margins may be higher -- but revenues on licensing is generally way lower.
It's like insurance -- if you underwrite it and take the risk you get 20% margins on $300/mo --- so say $60....but if it is not-underwritten (licensed) you get 80% margins on $25/mo.
Don't buy into the higher margins story - it will only help if there is a capacity shortage which would squeeze margins for ATLT under its current business model which is based on a capacity glut.
I don't play, but enjoy connecting the dots between questionable investments for those who choose to play.
May well be. Not a lot of creativity from the parties working the liquidity....almost always named after a fictional wall street character - Robert Axelrod etc etc
I didn't look too far down the message chain but Lynx Consulting is a LLC owned by the same guy who does their Investor Relations....which if you notice has the same street address at ATLT.
Unnecessary choice of terms - and possibly not a mistake.
AHAR is a quasi insider -- probably boosts his own profitability....and IMUNs.
Then again, they seemed to forget additional approval requirements....
No opinion - how a company should be classified is really more a matter how the market perceives it or how the company holds itself out.
Really not a material issue.
Not an attorney - so really can only speculate. I also don't know if the legal standards are different for listed vs. non-listed companies.
Your questions depend on whether it is a criminal or a civil action....both are possible in cases of alleged stock fraud.
Have absolutely no idea if or how long trading would be halted...or even when...although it would probably coincide with the announcement of some sort of legal action...or when the company is notified that it is under investigation (Wells notice). Don't know where you might even find that information.
Who pays depends on the type of action and which parties are being sued -- assume that things are initially covered by insurance or SG&A.
If you obtained information through your own research - and not from anyone who could be considered an insider - or who obtained the info from an insider - then trading is probably okay because you simply put pieces together - it might fall under "mosaic theory.
Look at someone like Andrew Left who often finds questionable information, takes a position and then publishes his suspicions. He's not a sellside analyst, so his trading would not be considered front-running.
What happens to management or any party allegedly involved depends on their role and the nature of the fraud. If management is found guilty - worst case scenario, people get jail time (think Bernie Ebbers) in a criminal trial, at a minimum restitution in both civil and criminal cases...being banned from the securities industry, having a senior role at a publicly traded company....there are myriad potential remedies/penalties. Again who pays depends on court findings, the individual and their role.
The investigative and judicial process is a LONG haul (think multiple years - not weeks or months)
Let me tell you. I just finished as a witness for a stock case that dates back about a decade ago. The DOJ/SEC takes this stuff seriously. They just took down one of the best known writers at Zack's on insider trading...for a couple hundred thou.
As to IMUN having people watching this board....it's possible....not directly...but possible. It was really interesting to point to another company that was supposed to present at an investor conference awhile back - had even put a PR out to that effect....checked with the conference people - nope that company hadn't expressed an interest -- 1 day later - company on the conference agenda - and then they ended up canceling.
dwarren428 - SEC is always watching things - they may well already have IMUN on their radar. But as the saying goes - "if you see something, say something"....if it doesn't pan out, it doesn't pan out.
At the same time -- putting a particular date for a contract close or whatever in an SEC filing does not make it a guarantee....and missing a deadline does not constitute a crime. Business circumstances change and these sorts of things are covered by the disclaimers.
However, if announcements are made to drive volume so a shareholder can increase or decrease holdings - or to move a price (like good news 10 mins before close to prevent shorts from covering) - then you are getting into dicey territory.
Seems like a discussion board is the place to raise different points of view. Guess not here. But if your manipulation suspicions are sincere...then I ask, what took you so long?
As I've written, I don't own the stock...so no skin in this game...which might make some discount my less than enthusiastic hypotheses. Playing devil's advocate based on direct experience with company in the past and 25 years covering healthcare on the Street. Always ask - where might my hypothesis be wrong?.
Exactly.
PS - RJ isn't an insider.....although news at this company leaks like a sieve....something to consider.
He is a very very strong promoter of the shares and he seems to truly see potential...but that maybe because he is (if memory serves) about 16.5m shares at the end of 2016.....up from 9m at the end of 2015. Timing, of course matters, but he may well be $3m or more in the hole on this stock -- along with any additional funds he has loaned the company from time to time.
Now maybe $3m isn't a lot to RJ.....but concentrated in a single holding....that's gotta hurt....and there's no saying how many friends/family/business associates he has here as well.
The company has an IR and PR effort.....that's what the consulting fees to Lynx are for (regardless of Lynx listing as an IT company).
Note they've also skipped out on at least two investor conferences in the past three month -- after they have put out PR saying that they would be attending....Sidoti was the latest.
One might contend that the PR's with "conference appearances" are largely to move share price.
Look at ATLT and you will find Lynx Consulting....Ditto Growthpoint Advisors...follow the breadcrumbs.
I'm glad you believe in this.
LDN, however, is not a biotech product. It is spec pharma at most. Biotech refers to large molecules that require special processing to create. IMUN does have other compounds in Cytocom..but that is a separate story.
The ER is up with the conference call info -- better almost late than actually late.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/atlas-technology-international-announces-record-162202584.html
Norfolk -- see my earlier post. They also backed out of Sidoti for tomorrow. Hopefully they are just too busy or understaffed.
Fedel -- they aren't presenting at Sidoti. Spoke with IR.
Not insinuating it is fake. I am sure it is signed. Just don't think the process of monetizing the product is complete.
You seem pretty invested in the story. I, as you note, am not. I've worked with the principals in the past...they believe in what they are doing....but execution --- not so great.
You could call IRP -- but you'll just get VM. Maybe there's a hold-up at Globe Newswire. Or a problem with the release...
Beating the dead horse - but a distribution agreement with "contractually agreed" minimums has been announced. No end customer/s. Contracts get re-inked all the time....is IMUN really going to pay attorneys to file suit against a distributor who handles GSK level product because a contractual minimum has been missed?
IR Firm too busy putting out PRs on GRNH from what I can tell.
Well - that was a bit last minute...one would think that if they announced in early September (or whenever the PR went out)...that the company (or its IR firm) would sign up by then. It may be a bomb...just not sure which kind.
Never mind. Spoke with Sidoti people - ATLT never requested registration. Wonder why they are putting out PRs of plans to present and then are no-shows. Any thoughts?
So ATLT is supposed to be presenting at Sidoti next week. They aren't on the calendar as far as I can tell. The Company also backed out of Marcum in June. Does anyone know if they were at the LD Micro event in SFO?
Call me a compliance NARC - but "our insiders", "do we need funding" - and this is not the first time I recall you using that term - suggests that you may be disseminating information that is not yours to share in a public forum.
I hope it works and it gets funding (not distribution agreements). The lack of funding with 12 years left on the opioid indication along with an extension for a new indication and or new formulation....suggests the science wasn't compelling....or that there's some conspiracy. I'll stick with the science. Don't own the stock, won't own the stock, won't short the stock.
I didn't need to be there to trust my colleague's view. The presenter didn't appear to have done any preparation except consume way too much Red Bull....ATLT may eventually become a good company...but it is a commodity story - and a start-up at that....if you want to play guess the sales trajectory - go ahead...but logic says that it will be choppy at best...and it is being sold as a momentum story.
Uh - not quite. If you look at the PR's or studies there is nothing saying that LDN while there is some indication of correlation to improved markers in a small bridging study....there is nothing to prove causation. Also(and I may be wrong) but there is NOTHING showing that LDN prevents or delays death in HIV patients. Finally, if you read the PR's the target patients are those where it is adjunct therapy - not standalone therapy. So there is no cost savings as other posters have suggested.
I didn't attend -- but word from a colleague who watched was that it was an addled mess. Maybe not so much the deck -- but the delivery. Based on their March conference call, it seems that management isn't that comfortable with English...so maybe they asked someone to pinch-hit who didn't know the story.
Did you see their last investor presentation? It did not go well.
What's missing - IMO - is who (or rather what) organization/entity is going to pay for the drug for patients. It could sit in a dbn center forever - booked by IMUN as a legitimate sale under GAAP - but for all practical purposes be channel stuffing....and it would be difficult to track simply because we won't have insight on inventory levels at the distributor. There is so much complexity in all of these dealings for IMUN - I think it is really difficult to say which transactions are at arm's length and which aren't.
What one would hope to see is not that "we have a distribution contract" but rather "the XYZ foundation or the government has allocated $XX dollars towards the purchase of Lodonal" - that would be a sale.
I hope I'm proven wrong.
FWIW - yesterday's big announcement reads to me like a distribution agreement tarted up to look like a purchase order...and not necessarily a binding agreement. Sales may be coming but there was no indication in that PR that there were actual purchase orders in hand...