InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

TC_Trader

05/31/15 9:07 PM

#35298 RE: Pyrrhonian #35297

Alright I am convinced you are not the same person as Steven Giardino on seeking alpha. He is much more intelligent than you. The responses here are partial rebuttals and partially immature. Steven at seeking alpha sticks to facts.
icon url

Astavakra

05/31/15 9:20 PM

#35300 RE: Pyrrhonian #35297

Pyrrh, I'm a bit disappointed. You were such an advocate for NW and the science. Something caused you to change your mind, and you started writing posts warning the board of ultimate failure. Then you took a hiatus from posting only to reappear with a 'contrarian view' after what was , by most accounts, an impressive presentation. Being that you are not a shareholder and don't intend on being one in the near future

I don't recall ever writing I wanted to buy NWBO back at any price. And I'm not holding any options or shares at the moment, and certainly not $6 July puts. Actually, I've never purchased a $6 strike put in NWBO.



I wonder what compels you to share your contrarian view with the board. Is it some sort of contempt for the company?
icon url

PacificNW

05/31/15 10:11 PM

#35305 RE: Pyrrhonian #35297

Amazing Pyrr is now the enemy simply because he gives his opinion which is what no one here want to hear. He alone makes this place fair and balanced. Sire I would like to know who he is to understand his motivations but I am grateful he doesn't allow himself to be bullied off of this board.
You can give your rebuttal to what he says but it looks like he is unwaivering and remaining consistent.
And after reading what he writes and what everyone else has I have to say once again he makes a good case. NWBO must survive, thus they must present everything they can in a positive light to us and to Woodward. They have the motivation and the will to do anything they can to survive, I can see Pyrr being right here whatever his motivations.
I predicted that the news would be positive prior to their announcement, some here didn't believe it would be good, some did. But based on how management handled themselves in I if my memory serves in 2007 and how LP makes deadlines that are never met and the inconsistencies with ASCO 2014 & 2015 I can't help but wonder what is it that we aren't being told. You know that they won't tell us anything that would hurt them, and that it only benefits them to spin the positive why is it so hard to believe what Pyrr writes. Is it only because as investors it isn't what you want to hear? Is that justified?