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.
Half Full,
It is your right to believe what you want to believe. But if I wanted to hang on to my money I would, at a minimum, be attentive to what a world expert in veterinary oncology has possibly said. kag
Mata Hari,
It sounds like there was nothing anonymous about the comment that Dr. Greg Ogilive made today. Those are the kind of statements that would not encourage much buying. kag
Gold Seeker,
So Dr. Greg Ogilvie, a world expert in veterinary oncology, stated today that cancer in dogs is too diverse for one marker. That is exactly the kind of information that is needed for making good investment decisions. kag
Mcd2inga,
I agree with your post. When the same thing happens repetitively it certainly reduces the chances that it is just a coincidence. kag
Mysscat,
If compelling news ever occurs for BioCurex, I will make a post to that effect. kag
Half Full,
No, not all struggling, unprofitable biotechs have a stock price in the single digits. But not all biotechs have a history of press releases, with nothing visible ever materializing from them. kag
Half Full,
The eight cent stock price this morning has nothing to do with anyone singing present or future. It is directly related to BioCurex being an unprofitable, struggling biotech. Savvy traders understand that last Wednesday's announcement is possibly good for a trade and that is about it. For example, when was the last time anything was heard about saliva RECAF? kag
Eight cents and more shares go underwater. Will some investors ever learn that it isn't wise to buy struggling biotech stock on announcements that are more about hope than anything else? kag
The current BioCurex stock price gives a clear indication of what investors thought of the OncoPet press release. kag
The Bocx,
Good grief, I am not trying to discredit Dr. Ogilvie. Since his quote in BioCurex's press release yesterday made no mention of RECAF, it naturally raises the question as to the source of the quote. Wouldn't it be a hoot if Dr. Ogilvie has never heard of RECAF? kag
What two things were noticeably absent in the text of yesterday’s press release? No marketing partner was mentioned and there was no statement at all from any veterinarian expressing any opinion about using RECAF on dogs. Go to the link below to see that the veterinarian mentioned in the press release left Colorado State University in 2003 and now resides in California. The personal information about Dr. Ogilvie that was used in BioCurex’s press release appears to be out of date. Which raises a question about the source of the quoted statement by Dr. Ogilvie? kag
http://www.californiaveterinaryspecialists.com/html/oncology.htm
“Dr. Ogilvie is director of the Angel Care Cancer Center at California Veterinary Specialists and president of the Special Care Foundation for Companion Animals. There, he cares for patients and their families; teaches interns, residents, and veterinary students; and has an active cancer research program. Prior to his move to Southern California, Dr. Ogilvie was a full tenured professor, internist, head of medical oncology, and director of the Medical Oncology Research Laboratory, Animal Cancer Center at Colorado State University (CSU) from 1987 until 2003.”
Mata Hari,
For struggling biotechs, the name of the game is always profit taking and savy traders are no doubt just waiting on the perceived peak before letting it rip. kag
Mata Hari,
Common sense would also indicate that the sell off from the recent gains is not far away. In other words, how long are savy traders going to restrain themselves? kag
The Bocx,
Do I need to point out that I was not the one who brought up the subject? But since you went ahead and added more fuel to the fire, it doesn't matter who negotiated the terms, the fact of the matter is that BioCurex currently has the right to cancel Abbott's license. And the important unanswered question to an investor should be why Abbott allowed that to happen if Abbott thought RECAF might have a huge revenue potential. kag
Longterm42,
Quandongboy did not address one important point of the Amendment. How about a reasonable explanation for why Abbott, if they thought RECAF had huge revenue potential, would allow BioCurex the right to cancel Abbott's license any time BioCurex wanted to? kag
Quandongboy,
A reasonable interpretation of the Abbott Amendment should also include an explanation as to why Abbott would allow, after paying the original upfront money to obtain a RECAF license, BioCurex to have the ability to unilaterally cancel Abbott’s license at any time BioCurex wanted to, if Abbott thought their RECAF license had a huge revenue potential. kag
The following is a post, titled “goldseeker & kag”, copied verbatim, from the BioCurex company message board:
“I have to wonder why these guys are even following this stock if they think its such a loser. I wouldnt even post and waste my time. My guess is that they bought stock high and have lost money, boo hoo. Or they like attention. Either way, they dont have much to say and certainly are very negative people. I have alot of faith in this company and their product. Why wouldnt I?”
The following is my comment concerning the above quoted post:
Why is it so difficult to comprehend that a person can be solely motivated to post what is factual and accurate? Isn’t that also a possibility? Over and over, I have challenged others to find something that I have posted that is not factual and accurate. That challenge is always followed by silence. The obvious distain for factual and accurate posts, that includes pointing out the company “warts”, likely is motivated by the fact that most current BioCurex investors are underwater. Is there anyone out there honest enough to admit that most current BioCurex investors are underwater? Is there anyone out there honest enough to admit that they don’t want anything negative mentioned because they desperately need to get extricated from their underwater position? The above quoted post is also not accurate. I have not lost any money in this stock. Additionally, I will also mention that I do not trade this stock and I am not paid to post on this board or any other board. What I do have contempt for is obvious outrageous positive statements that have no factual basis whatever. BioCurex will rise or fall based on a lot of factors, least of which being what is posted on a message board. Focus your efforts on accurate due dilligence and other important factors that all lead to successful investing. kag
Thorn,
You just posted: "I think the way Kag took over as soon as GS's posts ran out and how he further embellished his unsubstantiated points trying to add validity, makes a very strong case for them being one and the same poster."
My Comment: "Well Thorn, please write out, for all to read and backed up with factual documentation, where I have ever embellished or misrepresented anything. Based on what has been presented on this board, anyone with an open mind should be able to quickly determine that Wittenberg has either sold a lot of BioCurex stock or has failed to file the proper SEC Schedule 13-D. kag
Mata Hari,
You just posted the following sentence as a fact: "employees are motivated and wittenberg is not selling."
My Comment: Alright, present your proof that your above sentence is accurate. kag
Opportunity Knocking,
Listen, I am not Gold Seeker. Without any factual basis whatever, you continue to perpetrate that same falsehood.
Yesterday, Gold Seeker posted factual information that indicates one of two possibilities has occurred. Either Wittenberg has sold a lot of stock or there has been a failure to file a SEC Schedule 13-D. It would be helpful if you would spend a little time studying the facts of this matter before you accuse others of lying. kag
Half Full,
I understand why you would not like to consider the possibility that Wittenberg has sold a lot of BioCurex stock. kag
The Bocx,
This is not that difficult. After what Gold Seeker unearthed today, the risk in this stock could be off the Richter Magnitude Scale. kag
The Bocx,
You just posted: "Wittenberg resigned about 3 months ago. Yet, no catastrophe has so far taken place."
My Comment: Using your usual rationale, how do you know that some catastrophe is not about ready to take place? kag
The Bocx,
What Gold Seeker has uncovered has the potential to be very discouraging to faithful, longterm BioCurex investors and damaging to the stock in general. For over a year, BioCurex investors have hung on while watching the value of their BioCurex stock plummet. The evidence now indicates that a recently resigned BioCurex Director either has sold a lot of BioCurex stock or a SEC Schedule 13-D has not been properly filed. Common sense would seem to indicate that this former BioCurex likely would not have to specifically sell BioCurex stock to raise some cash. Especially if it was part of the more than two million shares of BioCurex stock that he just purchased at a price of 0.001 cents a share. kag
The Bocx,
You just posted the following sentence: “Whose opinion has more weight about the future of this company? Moro's or Wittenberg's?”
My comment: Well, they both had access to those quarterly updates from Inverness and it looks like Wittenberg may have sold a lot of stock recently. Prudent investors would likely be more than little concerned about that. kag
The Bocx,
You are grasping for straws. Your rebuttal to Gold Seeker fails to mention the fact that Dr. Wittenberg is no ordinary BioCurex investor. Until February 17, 2009 Dr. Wittenberg was a BioCurex Director among several other titles. He was an insider. He also is a dentist. Your claim that he may have needed cash is a bit lame. An investor, who buys into that possibility, probably would also be interested in some ocean-front property in Arizona. kag
Gold Seeker appears to have posted some difficult to dispute evidence that a former Director of BioCurex (who also held the positions of Principal Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer, Secretary, and Treasurer), who resigned on February 17, 2009, has either sold a lot of BioCurex shares or there has been a failure to file a required SEC Schedule 13-D. kag
SEC Schedule 13-D This Schedule discloses beneficial ownership of certain registered equity securities. Any person or group of persons who acquire a beneficial ownership of more than 5% of a class of registered equity securities of certain issuers must file a Schedule 13D reporting such acquisition together with certain other information within ten days after such acquisition. Moreover, any material changes in the facts set forth in the Schedule generally precipitates a duty to promptly file an amendment on Schedule 13D.
The Commission's rules define the term "beneficial owner" to be any person who directly or indirectly shares voting power or investment power (the power to sell the security). kag
Mata Hari,
What proof do you have that Wittenberg was asked to resign because he wasn't getting the filings done on time? kag
The following quotes are from a SEC Form S-8 dated 4/22/09:
"Dr. Wittenberg resigned as an officer and director of Biocurex on February 17, 2009."
"On February 24, 2009 Dr. Wittenberg exercised options and warrants to purchase 2,070,000 shares of Biocurex's common stock. The exercise price of the options and warrants was $0.001 per share. The closing price of Biocurex's common stock on February 24, 2009 was $0.08"
My Comment: Wittenberg has likely sold some or all of the above shares. kag
It certainly seems possible that there are sophisticated traders who have no trading fees and the necessary accounts to move the BioCurex share price up or down in a process that is all designed to separate naïve buyers from their money. kag
Opportunity Knocking,
You might consider a possible fly in the ointment. If anyone ever attempts to sell a RECAF rapid test, the likely only possibility would be Inverness. Let's assume for this discussion (but a prudent investor would not make the assumption based on what is currently in the public domain) that inverness is making progress with a RECAF rapid test. Inverness has to know that BioCurex is in financial trouble with its Smithline loan which is secured with a lien on essentially all of BioCurex's assets. If Inverness wanted to cut BioCurex out of the picture, it seems that all the elements for doing that are in place. All Inverness would have to do is keep quiet and wait until a default on the Smithline loan occurs and then indicate to Smithline that they might be interested in the assets at a distressed price. Time is on Inverness' side, but not on BioCurex's. kag
One of the material events that a public company must report on a SEC Form 8-K is any default or acceleration of an obligation. A company has four business days to do that, with no extensions available. kag
Mata Hari,
Why didn't you provide some factual-based documentation to give some credibility to your claim that misinformation about BOCX and its science is being posted on message boards? kag
i_invest_utrade,
I was asking for the names of the scientists and their specific comments that would indicate that there are some independent scientists who are "excited" about RECAF. Your reply furnished no names or comments. kag
Here is another statement from a post on the company board that deserves scrutiny: “Im not worried about them going bankrupt due to the potential that lies in this technology and the many scientists who are excited about this product.”
My comment: I happen to follow this stock rather closely and I immediately raised an eyebrow about the “… many scientists who are excited about this product.” I am not aware of any independent scientists who are "excited" about this product. If there are some excited scientists, who are they and what have they said? kag
A poster on the company board made the following statement yesterday: "I think it's crazy for anybody to be buying this stock right now, given the company's current financial situation."
My comment: The statement above conveys a great measure of investment wisdom. The poster is correct. There just isn't anything in the public domain right now that would justify putting even an additional penny into this stock considering the company's financial situation and a host of other reasons. kag
I would like to make a prediction based partly on investment wisdom and also on the steady decline in the stock price of BioCurex for many months now. Yesterday, the stock price of BioCurex dropped into the three cent range. More than a year of recent historical stock price data indicates that whenever BioCurex’s stock price hits a new low, the new low (sooner or later) becomes the current stock selling price. So I am predicting that the BioCurex stock price will shortly be in the three cent range. Anyone who does not purchase this stock until there is some compelling reason to do so, is likely relying on some sort of wisdom or the school of hard knocks or something besides the stock price being too cheap to resist. kag
The Bocx,
You posted: “Finally, wisdom - in any form - is something that I would not associate with the stock market.”
My comment: You seem to be suggesting that the chance of success or failure in the stock market has nothing to do with wisdom and is somehow associated with the odds of the flip of a coin. I just don't think that Warren Buffett would agree with you. kag
The Bocx,
You posted: “Whenever someone sells, someone else buys. The amount of money is roughly the same, the number of shares is the same and the information on which both parties base their decision is the same.”
My comment: It has been my personal observation that investors conduct varying amounts of due diligence on the stocks they own or are considering purchasing. Your comment that buyers and sellers base their decisions on the same information is undoubted not correct. kag