Brief quotes- read the rest for those interested "Shareholders' Rights Shareholders have the right to inspect a corporation's articles of incorporation and bylaws, but only limited rights to inspect accounting books and no right to inspect corporate communications and contracts. Different states may have slightly different rules, so check with an attorney regarding what your corporation is required to provide. In general, to inspect your accounting records, the shareholder must prove he has a good reason to believe an inspection is necessary and has proper intent. If you refuse, a court of law decides whether the shareholder's reason for inspecting your books is valid and proper, so simple curiosity and snooping by competitors is discouraged."
Again, I will stand by my post that you responded to. There is a difference in getting access to accounting books vs getting access to company internal working papers and support documents/analysis. And IMO I highly doubt that an analyst will go that far in asking to look at the record books and trying to do the job of an auditor (esp that of a forensic auditor who these latest lawsuits will most likely employ). I bet that some interesting stuff may be found from those accounting record books but for most people including analysts, it just maybe beyond their education and experience so that is why they trust and hire auditors or rely on the audited reports of 10K. You and other longs are welcome to try to ask for review of their accounting records but see how willing any management would be to comply. How many of you actually go that far in your DD. Will a Woodford analyst go that far- maybe but then they are taking on the role of an auditor. I'd rather be more interested in which patients were on Direct method A vs method B and what the actual enrollment numbers broken down to each month are. I'd also like to see the FDA communications that management have had and are having. If a Woodford analyst were to ask for those things, management will most likely flatly (and rightfully) refuse. So has a Woodford Analysts seen more than Pyrr and done more DD than him- maybe but I seriously doubt it. They are probably like Schnauzer1 who is comfortable with the level of DD for the decision that he/they made or recommended based on limited PUBLICLY available info- no INSIDER INFO acquired. JMHO because most lawyers and management will not knowingly break SEC laws esp insider trading laws and I assume the best for Woodford and his team.
And no, I don't follow Pyrr's every word, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the hard work and his generousity in sharing his DD. Just like you and others, I will make my own decisions and judge the merit of what is written in a MB as something to investigate but never accepted as "fact" but probabilities. You should be familiar with probabilities since you will be taking the auditing and attestation portion of the CPA exam. Good luck on passing the rest of the CPA exams- and relax and breath when you spend time on a MB. I won't respond to your other post regarding my response to SEnti because I'm not sure what triggered that one. Maybe you'll explain it to me someday- but you should be studying more and less time getting all riled up because of a MB. Best wishes- sincerely!
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
