Interesting posts today after the Rodman and Renshaw financing was announced. Who would have thought that PPHM would be financing at a cost basis of about seventy-five cents a share after the pps was held steady in the $1.20 to $1.40 range for such a long stretch. PPHM only achieved about 70% of the $30 million they had announced as their goal. That is a sad outcome after it looked like PPHM was so close to making a Russell run and staying in at the last minute. That sweeping market order for $1.32 at the close on May 31 that lost PPHM the Russell apparently had parties with a catchers mitt set up with a 75 cent financing. I guess long investors will not get to know what funding from staying on the good side of the Russell would have looked like, but I anticipated a large shake out would occur before PPHM would be allowed to move for success. Does the events of the last month count as a large shake out, LOL!?
Welcome to the new "born on date" today posters and new this week posters. Not surprisingly, you have taken to bashing PPHM management. Sorry, but your indignation and calls for throwing out the management team comes off to me as just an extension of the hard ball tactics that have been getting played over the last several weeks. I linked to my previous post where RB posters were discussing PPHM prospects for staying on the Russell after the $30 million funding target was announced. Congratulations on your success in helping deliver to the confusion of long investors who took comfort in Paul Lytle's statement about no current talks for a private placement.
Rodman and Renshaw is posted as having coordinated the assembly of this financing. Why did PPHM emphasize that point in the news release? What is the follow on benefit from bringing R & R into PPHM's financing world with a 75 cent average placement price when it looked for months like the stage had been set for PPHM to be pressed into a private placement with their usual funding parties? Unless, of course, PPHM had been able to deliver a deal reflecting the value of Bavi and the other PPHM products, but it is clear that the negotiating parties on the other side were playing hard ball.
In March, I had posted:
"Will PPHM be a spoiler and release news that moves pps before the short can cover? PPHM has a track record of not being effective at doing that. Now if they had help from a partner that is willing to oblige PPHM with price support as part of a deal, the situation can change overnight and create a short squeeze. PPHM explicitly said Monday that they are not pursuing a private placement and suggested the same when they filed for a $30 million shelf offering. I would think that PPHM has given its historic financiars and other parties interested in PPHM plenty of lead time to make their balance right, if such parties are still in the category of "friendly" to PPHM interests. If a party is not friendly to PPHM interests despite having been given plenty of time to come around..... we shall see what PPHM can do.
BTW, it looks like we are experiencing the shakeout I figured would occur before PPHM would move to "the next level". If not for doing DD, there would be no basis for telling the difference between a shakehout and real hardship when posters are going out of their way to deceive. I suggest all listen to that Cramer interview at least twice: once for entertainment value and again to take notes of what is common practice by hedge funds and how it may be getting applied to PPHM."
If someone wants to press SEC investigation, there will be financial records that show all the detail of the sweeping market order trade at the close on May 31. Sounds like a good starting point, especially since the paper trail should lead to some interesting places. Of course, if suit is brought against PPHM management, the process will require that May 31 closing trade and similar measures undergo full transaction disclosure by investigators. Unless our newly acquired bashers wish to shoot themselves in the foot, it falls on the shoulders of long investors to decide if legal action is warranted. Too much inside trading information appears to have been known by investing parties involved with the Russell orchestration that was not available to retail investors for an SEC investigation to not blaze a trail back to the shorting parties.
It looks like PPHM management now has had a hard lesson about what hedge funds can do. Or is it what potential partners might do to leverage their negotiating position.
Short interests 1, PPHM 0. Good thing for PPHM that the game is far from over. The $20 plus million sets PPHM up with operational funding for another year, longer if the Avid production for Halozyme is delivering decent returns. That is one of the few good things that can be cited from the R&R financing. We shall see over the next few weeks if R&R bring PPHM any further benefits.
Best wishes and IMO.
KT
AI
