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.
Much appreciated. I'm also looking into Alcoa (or more specifically its soon-to-be spin off company Arconic).
The more I think about getting into the powder side of this business, the more I like it. I vaguely remember reading an article one of you fine gentlemen posted not too long ago suggesting that one of the major hangups of widespread adoption of 3D printing (aside from regulatory red tape) was an immature supply chain (i.e. lack of metal powder). It seems arcam keenly recognized this and was just beginning to invest big time in ramping up powder production before our good friends at GE came into the picture. Just seems like the circumstances are ripe for a metal supplier or two to see some big growth. I'll report back if I find anything I like.
With the two best publicly traded 3D printer manufacturers (in my humble opinion) being taken off the market, the next logical investment in this space seems to be in the metal powder suppliers. With AM really starting to ramp up, the world is going to need a lot of metal powder. Has anyone looked into any powder suppliers that appear attractive? Obviously Arcam was one with AP&C, but I'm embarrassingly ignorant as to the other players in this arena.
Hear, hear. Must give credit where it's due. Thank you Charlie. You put a lot of elbow grease into this board. Greatly appreciated.
Is there anyone who listened to the CC who would mind saying whether Rene gave an update on FastEBM/next gen machines? I believe the move to the next generation of faster machines will be the watershed moment for our beloved little company. Everything else is just white noise to me.
Thanks a lot for the follow up 123. A little disappointing we won't at least get an update until next year, but excited for the future. I think fastEBM is going to be the watershed moment for this technology and company because once a part can be 3d printed fast enough to become economically competitive with traditional manufacturing, the dominos will start to tumble.
Thanks for the recap. Any mention during the CC of their progress in their development of next gen machines (FastEBM)?
This is an intelligent post. I enjoyed reading it. Why don't you do this more often, as opposed to the roboposts you churn out when you've taken a position in the stock?
Ha. By people do you mean you and solantey? I think that was the point.
I appreciate your posts today. I wholeheartedly agree with your overall sentiment.
Today had been incredibly fun, but the real catalyst is still the partnership agreement. Once we ink that deal, it transforms AMBS from a dream into reality. Hope for another great day tomorrow.
Everyone is familiar with the old adage that the price of something is only whatever someone will pay for it. Well our "price" right now is very little because no one's ever bought anything from us before. But that will soon change drastically as soon as that partnership deal is executed.
I agree that the data will benefit the share price and will generally be cathartic for all us longs who've waited patiently. But it's the partnership announcement that will really move the stock. The market wants to see money, and cash up front would move the PPS in a big way.
Risk, I like your enthusiasm, but I wouldn't be disappointed if we didn't experience a big price swing next week. Its the partnership announcement that will do that, which we now know is very close at hand.
Fantastic. GC expects to finalize the partnership by the end of the summer. The partnership announcement will be truly transformational news, and we now confidently know that it is very close. This is the best news I have heard in a long time.
A partnership announcement will come, but I wouldn't expect it at the AAIC. Per Gerald's June 18th blog, "we are currently working through the intricacies of what [a partnership agreement] would entail. [] We believe the data to be released at AAIC . . . will increase the value of LymPro and give us additional leverage in negotiations."
In other words, no partnership agreement has been executed yet, and it is very unlikely one will have been prior to the AAIC. We should expect Gerald to release data, but not announce a partnership. Let's keep expectations in check so as not to suffer another disappointing PPS move after inflated expectations meet reality. We should be focused only on the data that will be released, and that should be a great milestone in and of itself.
If karma existed a partnership would be announced on Monday morning at 8am.
It's right there in the definition isn't it. Good note JP.
I don't necessarily expect that the announcement is imminent, but I think we can expect it come relatively soon considering the plan is to commercialize in 2H 2014 and we're already in June. That said, I'm not losing any sleep over it. At this point we know that it's coming, it's just a matter of time.
Internal execution such as finalizing the terms of a commercialization partner I hope.
The SEC halted trading of a company that was violating US securities laws and you're mad at the SEC? How about the company that failed to properly disclose information to the marketplace?
I have to admit that I'm skeptical too. I think based on how long Watson had been posting and the content of his posts, he is probably a genuine person making genuine predictions based on his information and belief. But many of his predictions have been inaccurate (not necessarily faulting him for that as no one is infallible), and this particular one today does indeed sound too good to be true.
I personally have no idea how far along the partnership negotiations are, but what I do know is that even when an agreement has been reached in principle, it can take many weeks to finalize the language in the actual contract. It's clear from Gerald's comments that a partner has been identified (which is outstanding news in and of itself), but I wouldn't be surprised at all if a formal announcement wasn't made until the conference in July.
Risk, your efforts are greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Has anyone seen a synopsis or perhaps the slide deck for JC's presentation last week? I'd love to see what he had to say about phenoguard's development.
I could not have said it any better. Joboggi, all conclusions and no premises isn't very persuasive. If you have support for your assertions I'd like to hear it (sincerely). But conclusory, circular statements aren't helpful. It's like me saying Chicago-style deep dish pizza tastes good because it's delicious. While this particular example may already be self-evident, my statement alone is useless.
I said evidence suggesting that it was effective and safe, not that it was effective and safe. A lot of good data showing MANF is effective in mouse models and it is unlikely to be toxic because it's a compound produced in the body. But you're dead on in that we won't truly know how effective and safe it is until we go through human trials. But that goes back to my point that drug compounds are notoriously unpredictable, and we cannot be sure.
My point was just to ask joe what his argument was for the downside of the stock because I'm interested to hear devils advocates to my own point of view. But I do appreciate you keeping me from getting ahead of myself. That's usually the function I perform, so I respect that.
Interested to know what's your rationale. I would argue just the opposite. I'll grant you that drug compounds are highly risky and unpredictable generally, but there's a lot of evidence suggesting that these compounds specifically, LymPro, MANF, and eltoprazine, are all effective and safe. If just one makes it to market, especially MANF, the upside is tremendous.
It may drift up or down a bit while we wait, but with what we know it seems like this is the bottom and it could explode at any time.
Ha that cheeky... I will (very happily I might add) admit that he's been accurate with some of his predictions. But he conveniently left off the many other predictions that he's missed (and/or have not yet come to fruition) from his list. I hope he turns out to be right, but I would prefer for everyone to keep him in perspective and not get ahead of ourselves. That's my only point.
Does anyone follow him on twitter? Does he make other predictions regarding other stocks, or is he an AMBS "specialist."
For the record I don't put much faith into what he says because he's been wrong much more frequently than he's been right, but his BU call did raise my eyebrows.
I believe it is, and the findings are fantastic. Wonderful news
Dial it down a notch. He was speaking hypothetically if they were to reverse split at the current PPS. Gerald has already stated unequivocally on the record that the company will not perform a RS at these levels. He was not prognosticating that AMBS will perform a 50-1 reverse split. Be more careful and/or honest regarding how you phrase your posts.
Interesting, but he doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to his predictions. I would like to believe it, but he hasn't established enough credibility for me to give it much weight. If the results of Mart Saarma's study are positive, and the evidence gathered to this point leads me to believe that they probably will be, a partnership could be forthcoming. But the studies to date have been very preliminary, and I won't take a partnership to the bank on fibanacci's word
If you're wise, in my unsolicited opinion, you're invested in AMBS for MANF, not LymPro, which puts you on roughly a 3 year track or more. While LymPro is certainly a potential moneymaker, MANF is a potential once-in-a-generation drug. If MANF even begins to approach the success of a blockbuster drug like, say, Lipitor, we'll all be fighting over who gets to name their yacht after Gerald.
My point is, if you're in this for MANF, take a step back and reframe your outlook on AMBS. These day to day swings regarding the progression of LymPro that some seem to get so upset about are trivial in the grand scheme of things. Simply let the company execute it's action plan, which appears to be sound, and don't demand a PR every morning and night. I for one like that Gerald doesn't hyper-actively pump the stock like some CEOs I've seen (i.e., NVIV's ex-CEO) because when expectations inevitably meet reality, those stocks implode (I believe NVIV investors have filed suit against the former CEO). In sum, to put things in perspective, LymPro is the Wednesday par 3 tournament, while MANF is the Masters. I try to keep this in mind.
"As a result of these steps, we are in a position to initiate a partnering process for the CLIA commercial launch of lympro in the second half of 2014."
"As a result of the improvements in these critical areas, the Company initiated a partnering process in the first quarter of 2014 for the CLIA commercial launch of lympro."
"In summary, we have continued to make progress in recent months with our lympro product development program and have put ourselves in a position to develop a meaningful commercialization and marketing partnership for our CLIA assay as we head into the second quarter of 2014."
This is what I like to call discreetly beating someone over the head with information (I strive to do it all the time in my legal writing). He may not have expressly stated that a partnership is forthcoming in the next several months, but almost any informed, engaged reader would have left the blog with that impression.
Phenomenal find as usual barcode. Very interesting that Dr. Kirby was part of the company that owned Lympro prior to it being acquired by amarantus. If memory serves, this or something very similar was also the case with Dr. Simon and eltoprazine. In my view, it shows extreme confidence in the science behind these drugs that people who were previously involved in their development have come back to work with it further. Again, there appears to be so much circumstantial evidence that these drugs are winners, it's just a matter of time before this company breaks out.
My thoughts exactly. Great blog post if you're a long term investor. I like all of the moves the company is making. I also counted 3 references to partnering for commercialization. I'll quote them when I have the time. It looks like it's not if, but when.
More evidence that AMBS plans to "go it alone" with lympro it seems to me, at least for now. And that's just fine. I like keeping the equity in my assets.
As far as I can tell the quality and speed of DMLS and EBM are largely similar as of right now. Yet for whatever reason DMLS seems to have a stronger foothold in the industry. Maybe because it came along a little earlier and that's simply who manufacturers are more comfortable with at this point. But If fastEBM can gain a competitive advantage in speed that substantially affects the bottom line of manufacturers, watch out. That said, I wish EOS was publicly traded as well.
Nice analysis. Very classy. Do I owe you 40 bucks a month for that?
Why do you believe it's comparatively undervalued?
Hilarious level of misreasoning there. That is a textbook example of a false dilemma. You (intentionally) fail to take into account the countless possibilities in between your two extremes. At least put a little effort in trying to instill fear. That was just lazy.
You've either managed to convince yourself that you're not disingenuous, or you're doubling down on your disingenuity. Either way, it's well documented that everyone is aware of your game. Maybe it's time to stop posting for a while. I mean, and this is an honest question, do you like getting ridiculed on a daily basis? You bring it upon yourself.
Even if your assertion is true, there is nothing wrong with buying and selling shares. There is something wrong, however, with buying and selling and then spreading misinformation in an attempt to sway opinion for your own personal gain. It's the malintent that's present in the second scenario that makes it culpable.
Ah, then I misinterpreted your post. Apologies for putting words in your mouth.
I suppose the next question is what is the definition of hard evidence. However we may choose to define it, I think we can agree that the evidence is not extensive and is mostly circumstantial at this point, but there is some. Whether it's persuasive or not is another matter.