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.
THANKS RWWEST
yes just learned that this am. NNVC wanted to create an anti-viral drug to treat those already infected....since 2005 the never did...not even once.
NVAX 's med, if they can ever produce one (have they?) prevents infection...a vaccine.
BTW, tho i have no buy signal yet, behavior on Friday got the signal considerably closer to the first of 3 "buy-thresholds". As each threshold is crossed, the probability of a loss on the total position drops by 50%.
Even when all 3 have been crossed, (p) of loss is still 0.30.
trendliner
HOW IS THEIR TECHNOLOGY DIFFERENT THAN NANOVIRICIDES
I used to own nnvc long ago. I am primarily a technical analysis based trader but i do like to understand a stock's business/technology.
Recently, NVAX was flagged by my screener for stocks forming interesting price & volume behavior patterns warrentingr closer monitoring for a possible entry signal (so no buy signal at this time). Said differently there is a setup of necessary conditions in place, but not yet sufficient conditions to enter long. I miss a lot of boats this way, but once aboard fewer sink.
If anyone knows how NVAX's nano-based approach is different fron that of NNVC'S, I'd be grateful for any insight.
thanks
trendliner
A 1:20 REVERSE SPLIT WARRANTS A 20 FOLD INCREASE IN THE SHARE PRICE
Anything less that that represents a decline in the stock, which closed yesterday at $3.36. Thus the stock should now be at $67.20 by this logic, instead of its current market price of $10.58.
If this loigic is flawed please let me know how.
trendliner
LISTING REQUIRMENTS FOR NYSE/AMEX SMALL CAP MARKET
If the company has no earnings there are 3 requirments all of which must be met to continue to be listed
1)Market cap must remain in excess of 15,000,000 vs. the stock's current market cap of 7,800,000
2)Share price in excess of $3.00 ( now near 2.00)
3) Shareholder equity of at least 4 million ( 10.6M as of last Balance Sheet)
The stock meets 1 of 3. Unless this changes within 30 days it's a candidate for delising. I got this information from my broker.
Trendliner
MINIMUM MARKET CAP TO REMAIN LISTED ON NYSE SMALL-CAP EXCHANGE?
Does anyone know what the minimum market capitalization is to remain listed on the small-cap NYSE board?
I called the NYSE and they would not speak with an individual investor. Neither of the two brokers I use had knew.
Perhaps there is no stated minimum and it's at the discretion of the exchange?
Trendliner
A SURE-FIRE WAY TO RAISE THE STOCK PRICE
NNVC has done another reverse stock split. This time 1 for 20. In general, reverse splits are done to avoid being delisted.
Desai & Jain ( 1997) show that the future prospects for stocks that undergo a reverse split are, to put it gently, not encouraging. In the 3 years following the reverse split there is an excess return of -34%. Of course this would be no surprise for a company that has failed to produce a single product since 2005.
Trendliner
ALL LITTLE KNOWLEDGE IS A DANGEROU THING DRINK DEEP BUT TASTE NOT.....
KMBJN the errors and misundeerstandings in your post are too numerous to address. If Dr. Mills had actually demonstrated what he has claimed it would be front page news in every newspaper on the planet. Instead his "discoeries" are found in obscure Youtube videos.
You sound like a smart man. Just the way your write indicates that. But at the same time you are naieve about how science works. That's not a crime. what is a crime or should be is sucking money out of people who don't understand how sicence works. Mills has managed to do this since 1991. He's either a crack pot or a con man. If he's the latter, he depends on people with too much money and too little knowledge.
Trendliner
NO KMBJN, REASONABLE PEOPLE DO NOT DISAGREE ON ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC FACTS
Quantum mechanics does not allow the claims of Dr. Randy Mills claims to be true.
In contrast, there is nothing about Dr. Diwan's claims about how a nanviricide would work that conflict with established undestanding of chemistry. Dr. Diwan has simply failed go put it into commericial practice.
Dr. Mills will never be able to show knowleddgeable scientists his claims are true. All he will ever have are youtube videos that impress non-scientists and a continual stream of excuses why he has not been abble to produce net power output from a fusion reaction since he began making his absurd claims in 1991.
Either Mills understands that hydrinos are pure fiction and thus making him a charlatan or he does not and making him a crackpot. There is no middle ground for reasonable people to disagree. Just as there is no middle ground on the issue of a flat-earth. Both are flat out wrong.
Trendliner
DISTINCTION BETWEEN BLP AND NNVC
You hit the nail on the head Nanotoday. In the case of BLP, the scientific basis of their claim is as they say "worse than wrong". All of quantum physics and all the investions we use today that would only work if the essence of quantum mechanics (QM) were right would have to be wrong for BLP's "hydrino hype( below ground state hydrogen atom) to be true. So we know that BLP can only sell its story to those who don't understand the ABC s of QM.
In the NNVC case there is no sceintific reason why the basis of a nanoviricide can't possbiliy work. In fact a research group at MIT has shown that the conceptual basis of a nanoviricide is essentially correct. NNVC's probem and the basis of a law suit is that they have never gotten it to be commercially feasible but their statments to investors have presented a diffent picture - a picture of progress towards that goal.
BLP has lied about the science while NNVC has lied about its progress to commercialize a valid idea. It turns out that proving the latter will be easier than proving the former.
Trendliner
NNVC IS FOLLOWING THE SCRIPT OVER THAT BRILLIANT LIGHT POWER TO THE WORD
To know the future of NNVC simply follow news developents over at BLP. The match is too close for coincidence.
Lawsuites anyone?
Trendliner
WOW NO POSTS SINCE JUNE 20TH...
Well, I guess that makes it official....interest in this stock has gone to zero and just as things are about to get interesting.
Trendliner
MY GUESS....THE S..T HITS THE FAN BEFORE NOVEMBER
AD has lost his key cover. That was his big mistake. In the end, control-freaks wind up losing control because of actions taken to maintain or increase their control.
One of the first lessons when learning to fly a helicopter....don't grip the stick too tightly because doing so amplifies small hand movements leading to a disastrous feedback cycle... and the system destabilizes.
TL
SO THIS IS THE S..T HITTING THE FAN FOR AD???
Floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee.
Maybe this is just a trickle through the dyke.
A KEY DISTINCTION BETWEEN BLP AND NNVC IS.....
While Brilliant Light Power has raised plenty of money from the well heeled but scientifically naive via private placement, NNVC has a publicly owned stock. Thus SEC can go after NNVC. Private placements are outside of SEC purview. However, they are not immune from government regulation.
Some of the investors in BLP are well connected, thus if they finally realize they have been duped regulatory forces will come knocking on BLP's door. What is truly brilliant about BLP is Randy Mills' ability to keep the believers believing despite his assertions being 100% contradicted by the most well established physics and despite the of anything that resembles evidence.
NNVC, in contrast will be the target of the SEC and it's claims are not contradicted by science. It's simply they have been unable to demonstrate that they can in fact do what they propose, despite repeated assurances they can. Diwan has left himself open to many charges of illegality. Were it not for the lack of funding at the SEC for enforcement, he would already be in big trouble.
So there are similarities, but the differences are more important.
Trendliner
NO COMMENT UNTIL THE TIME LIMIT IS UP
THE LEGAL FUTURE OF NNVC CAN BE UNDERSTOOD BY THE EXAMPLE SET BY BLP
Though it could be worse, because BLP, aka Brilliant Light Power is based on a pseudo science that is completely contradicted by all of modern physics. And after years of trying ( since 1991) BLP has been unable to demonstrate anything other that a carefully orchestrated youtube video that would not pass must with a first year physics student.
In contrast NNVC's claims are at least consistent with well understood and well verified chemistry.
For this reason, NNVC's investors can make a stronger case for fraud.
Will the SEC or other authorities take notice? I would not bet against it.
The stock is headed to zero.
Trendliner
WHEN THE MARKET SAYS I AM WRONG - I DON'T ARGUE
My NNVC trade was not the win I had hoped for but it made money so I;ve no complaints. With an average entry price of 29.6 cents and an average exit of 54.5 over a period of a bit less than two months, I will take it.
I concluded yesterday that my hypothesis of an IP deal was not the primary driver. Rather, it was the death-spiral funding that that was announced yesterday. The stock sliced through a trailing stop and I was out.
The exit methods used for the partial exit at 65 cents and exit of the rest at 47 cents are fully described on the reddit forum. No magic just some solid TA. The entry was based on the CP method I mentioned here last summer when i was posting more frequently.
Trendliner
THE RELEASE DOES NOT PROVE BUT IS CONSISTENT WITH....
1) the notion that Diwan has every intention of being fair with NNVC shareholders. As I mentioned in a recent post, he would have no reason to not be fair, given that he will still reap the lion's share of the reward if an IP deal is done. And he should, he invented the stuff
2) the notion that an IP deal is in the works. I have speculated that it would most likely be with a Chinese entity because of their intense interest in nanotechnology and the prospect that Shingrex won't be available in sufficient supply for their population for at least 5 years.
The stock's surge is not a surprise to technically oriented traders. The signals were as clear as they get in this noisy domain. I retain most of my position which has an average entry of 29 cents. Some was automatically sold this morning, based on an MA deviation rule that I discussed on Reddit. Frankly, I was surprised it took place this quickly but that's the reason for resting limit orders. $0.80 to 1.20 remains as my target.
The stock is strictly a trading vehicle. As an investment I still see it going to zero.
Trendliner
UNMISTAKABLE BULLISH SIGNALS
There is an increasing probability of a move to the 1.00 +/- 0/20 area.
Since there is negligible short interest in the stock, the move will not be the result of short-covering.
The best rationale, IMHO, is an IP transaction with China. The motivation is the short supply of Shingrex. It is not expected to be available in China in a significant way for about five years. Moreover, China is interested in dominating the world of nanotechnology.
I don't expect the IP deal to save NNVC long-term but it will offer longs a chance to exit has higher prices.
Trendliner
A FAVORABLE RESOLUTION TO TRADE TALKS WITH CHINA WILL INCREASE THE PROBABILITY OF AN IP DEAL SUBSTANTIALLY
A reasonable estimate would be a probability increase of 1.5 times current levels. I doubt anything will happen before trade tensions are resolved.
13F filings continue to bolster my confidence in the bull case.
Trendliner
IF THERE IS AN IP DEAL DIWAN WILL TREAT THE NNVC SHAREHOLDERS AS IF THEY OWNED A LICENSE
There is no basis for asserting he would do anything less. Sure he will benefit the most. He should, he's the inventor.
A reasonable valuation range for the IP is 60 cents to 1.20. My bet is the deal will be done around 1.00, for a nice round number.
The stock is a reasonable speculative long at these prices. The stock has been more than kind to me since New Years.
Trendliner
MY GUESS FOR IP ACQUISITION WOULD BE A CHINESE COMPANY WITH NNVC SHAREHOLDERS GETTING
in the range of 0.60 to 1.20 per share. They could really do something with it and the higher than expected efficacy of Shingrex would not be a concern for them. It makes no sense for a US based company given the R&D tax laws here. Diwan will come out fine and he would have no motivation for doing NNVC shareholders out of such an amount.
Of course, it's a conjecture.
The 0.60 to 1.20 is entirely justified by the technical action.
Trendliner
RENTEC INCREASES HOLDINGS IN NNVC
Should we care?. Well, actually yes. Rentech's Medallion fund has generated pre-fee annualized returns in excess of 70%/year compounded (? 35% after fees).
They buy and sell stocks on a purely objective, model-based signal.
And why are new institutions initiating positions? Check NASDAQ's website.
It's unlikely that NNVC can realize the profit potential of its IP but a better funded company may be able to. The problem with most fundamental valuation models is they don't consider the value of IP very accurately, but a public domain model does ( Flignor & Orozco). A return of to 1.00 is in the cards, IMHO.
Trendliner
HOW LOW CAN BITCOIN GO
The next reasonable target is 3,000. I think that will be the bottom. Momentum patterns suggest that the recent low at 3710 will not hold becasue it was confirmed by PPO (see below)
3000 +/- 200 looks reasonable ( 2800 - 3200) I would refrain from any buying until there is a clear non-confirmation (bullish divergence) between momentum and price. For momentum I am using the PPO ( percentage price oscillator which is similar to MACD except that the differential between the two exponential averages is a percentage rather than a simple point difference. The last low at 3710 was confirmed by PPO ( using 3, 10 and 16 as the parameters of PPO.
Trendliner
REALITY IF FAR DIFFERENT FROM YOUR PERCEPTION
Read the 10-Q with some care and my point is abundantly supported.
Diwan goes down with the ship but Gene is doing just fine.
You got to know when to hold'em and when to fold'em.
Trendliner
IT'S POSSIBLE FB WILL COME UP WITH A NEW BUSINESS MODEL
But that is sheer speculation. It's a rich company with a lot of resources. Over its career, IBM shifted business models a number of time and prospered. Will FB? It's a huge cloud of uncertainty and we all know that Mr. Market hates uncertainty.
As I said in my post, it will be a very long while before FB sees new highs, if ever. The path of least resistance is now down.
Trendliner
DOWNSIDE PRICE TARGETS
Months ago on this board I announced the up trend in FB was over and that a major down move was ahead. Thus far the stock has erased nearly 50% of its entire price gain since the lows of 2012.
How far might the down move carry. Using various TA methods there are three, widely disparate price objectives.
Scenario 1: $100 +/$10 ( 90-119).
Scenario 2: $80 +/- $5
Scenario 3: $35+/- $8
I believe the most likely is Scenario 2. Scenario 3 made no sense to me until I spoke with a fundamental analyst who remains bullish on the stock but said there is a possible disaster scenario. The basic business model of FB, could be challenged on personal privacy grounds. That is users of FB would have to give actual permission to FB to use their personal data. FB could motivate users to do this with all sorts of perks but it would be very costly to FB according to this analyst. If this were to occur, and the analyst gives it about 10% likelihood FB would survive but as a run-of-the-mill enterprise and 25-35 per share would be very much a possibility.
It will be along time before FB makes new highs. A very long time.
Trendliner
IT'S ALL IN THE 10-Q
Gene may no longer be with the company but it does not take a much of a leap of imagination see him as the author. My hat is off to the man.
Gene runs circles around Diwan any day.
Trendliner
SO GENE GETS THE LAST LAUGH
KMBJN: THE ARTICLE WAS WAY OVER MY HEAD
But with that said, had there been any actual proof of a below-ground state hydrogen atom, the hydrino, an obscure journal of physics from China would not have been the only place where it would have been reported. Physical Review Letters would have published it, even if it were not the primary reporting journal and it would behead line news in the New York Times - A headline something like this: New State of Matter Discovered that Invalidates Quantum Mechanics - Your Cell Phone Will No Longer Work. There would be conferences held world over.
That such a discovery would be dismissed by all simply because it flies in the face of the current paradigm, fies in the face of how science works.
By all means allow yourself to be entertained by the machinations of Dr. Mills. He's a great showman. Consider yourself fortunate that he is not selling stock.
Trendliner
TO KMBJN
Yes, I did see Randy's latest video.
Once again he demonstrates he is unwilling to share anything that is remotely close to scientific proof. There is no way for a viewer of the video to determine if the "energy source" puts out more energy than is required to run it. Nor does a viewer know if the energy is from the mechanism that Randy claims, an electron dropping to an energy state below ground level.
In comparison to NNVC, at least the mechanism of action claimed by NNVC does not violate the laws of physics. Randy's claim does violate well-established principles of physics, principles that are required for the computer to work that I am using to write this post.
Trendliner
THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE
The BH who attended an NNVC meeting and the BH who created stock scams are two different people.
COMPANY AND STOCK ARE DIFFERENT ENTITIES
Over the very long-term, a strong company correlates with a strong stock. However, there are cycles of market psychology that ride on top of the long-term growth trend.
FB is a strong company that will continue to prosper. However, now the tide of market psychology is turning down. The first and clearest sign, IMHO is the reversal of the stock's relative price trend (relative strength). This has clearly reverse to the downside. The absolute price is forming a long-term top. This is most obvious in price velocity indicators such as stock charts PPO. The late March decline and recent declines in August and September are showing very negative velocity that was not seen during FB' multi-year uptrend. They are characteristic of up trend reversals.
A reasonable TA estimate of FB's downside is 90 -110 but these targeting methods are subject to large errors so I prefer to watch the pattern evolve and revise projections as needed.
The long-term bulls on FB are going to go through a period of pain and testing.
Trendliner
FB LONG-TERM RELATIVE UPTREND HAS REVERSED
This is based on TA analysis of FB's performance relative to a group of technology peers. Long holders may get opportunities to liquidate as the absolute price builds a top. Absolute price has not had a clear cut-price reversal yet, but the failure of its relative price trend makes that likely. Relative price trends are useful for just this reason.
How far will a downtrend carry? My best estimate now, based on various TA projection methods is 90-95 dollars.
FB is a solid company. But the stock is not solid now.
Trendliner
NNVC
NNVC ( Nanoviricides) is a stock is a clear downward trend. I had been posting TA analysis on another board but the audience was not receptive to TA analysis. So I would like to post here about this stock and others that I follow.
I have also been tracking the XRT ( Spyder Retail ETF). It is bullish both on an absolute and relative strength basis. The point and figure chart of the XRT/SPY is strong. For P&F charting I prefer the dynamic scaling feature offered on stockcharts.com. I typically use 20 Day Average True Range as the scaling factor which is the default value.
Trendliner
FUTURE TA POSTS ON NNVC
Will be posted on the other board. I think interested parties know the one I mean (hint R).
I exchanged emails Gene and will provide some details on that too. Surprising, to say the least.
Trendliner
READ THE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON RIDA, RIEFF AND RIDGE FUNDS
They make investments that are long-term relative to the M-Fund. How long, is not disclosed.
Trendliner
WRONG ON AT LEAST TWO COUNTS
1) The M-Funds trades are very short term but RT has several other funds that hold for much longer periods of time.
2) All of RT's strategies are algo-based. Some strategies, however, act like what a human market marker used to do but they do it more efficiently. The position in NNVC may be nothing more than the inventory as of a given date for that function.
Trendliner
WHY RENTEC WOULD CONTINUE TO HOLD SHARES IN NNVC IS SEEMS STRANGE
I do know they are a 100% algo-driven shop. This was true even 20 years ago when I was invited to give a presentation there. In the end, I had nothing new to tell them.
It's possible NNVC was a stock picked for index replication - instead of buying all stocks in an entire index a subset of the stocks can be used if they serve the same purpose in terms of correlation, volatility and whatever other characteristics are being modeled.
At one time I was an investor in their M-fund but back in the early 2000s ( 2004 or 05) they kicked out all outside investors and kept the M-fund only for employees. They must be doing something right at M-fund given that they generate returns in excess of 35% per year compounded AFTER taking an incentive fee of 45% of gross profits and a 5% fee on assets. This is the highest fee structure, by far, of all hedge funds with which I am familiar and yet they still manage to neet 35% per year to investors. Their larger funds available to outside investors are good but they are not nearly as good as the M-fund.
Trendliner
YES,,,,THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED ME WAS EXITING A CHUNK
And when I did I felt sure that I had made an error. After I sold stock in the 5.50-5.90 range on 9/19/2013, the stock continued up to 7.5 by the 25th of the month. My gut said the stock was going to 10 or higher. I still had a good amount but I was out of enough so that if the remaining stock went to zero I would come out without a loss of original dollars.
In fact, I sold the rest in late 2015 at around 1.12 - 1.15. It subsequently went to about 3.50 in early 2016, again leaving me feeling dumb.
In retrospect, I should have sold more in 2013. My limit sell orders placed in early July. My estimates of the next price peak would allow my limit orders to be executed were based on TA. You and others will say that I was just lucky. Perhaps so. In fact, TA understated the upside potential by 2 bucks.
Had I followed my plan to exit I too would have been screwed or perhaps better said I screwed myself. My error as falling in love with a story...the good old narrative fallacy. Once in love, that story served as a filter on new information.
Trendliner