All great points and I completely agree with your observations. They are hurting their own credibility by making some of the claims you point to. Humility, listening and learning mindset is key to a long, successful career in whatever you do. The reality is 90% of biotechs fail and therefore shorts have it easy, IMO. Even without any DD, they are likely to be right 9 out of 10 times. That’s why small biotech are one of the most heavily shorted space. However, I will point out that the one that succeeds is a home run, to put it conservatively! 20-30x returns, if not more. The ones I think are going to hurt some of the shorts the most over the next couple of months are CYDY, NWBO and likely CVM.
Technology and social media is a great equalizer! Zoom, YT, FB, Twitter, etc have made it easy for just about everyone to follow science talks, publications, symposia, etc by KOL groups and form their own opinion rather blindly trusting an analyst report (even if it’s semi decent). Gone are the days when only select few folks or analysts would have access to the company’s top executives, competitors, scientists, data, publications, etc. Besides, how can these so called analysts become expert of 100s of drugs in such a short span? And often times, these guys claim to know more about the science and data then the leading scientists and Co-PIs, collaborators on the project. I’d rather trust science leaders who have been studying these topics throughout their career. In short, in this day and age of information technology revolution, you can not expect folks to believe in articles that have no substance.
And to be honest, pandemic is actually amplifying this effect. Folks working remotely from home or working limited hours or out of work have more time on their hands to do their own research and make their own judgement. Good luck everyone! We have a winner!
