Replies to post #127817 on NanoViricides Inc (NNVC)

[arvitar]

The usual method of destroying the "short cabal" is to perform.

i.e. Actually get a billion-dollar drug approved, rather than spewing bullshit about it for twelve years, and failing to even identify a single lead.

This li'l bit of absurdly silly monkey business might very well be what finally gets the SEC involved.

[arvitar]

By the way, did Seymour provide that selected piece of transcript, and ask that it be broadcasted on non-company message boards?

Or was this transcript fairly made available to the investing public at 1:00p.m

[Rawnoc]

53 years and the moron still doesn't understand you can't force a cover with a warrant dividend?

Let me explain how these things usually go down:

1. Shareholders will likely get their warrant dividend as a separate, publicly traded entity most likely with the symbol NNVCW.

2. Shorts will therefore be short the same NNVCW symbol.

3. Shorts, just like longs, can either close this separate position out in the open market or by exercising. Since these things always trade with a slight premium prior to expiration, there is little incentive to do anything outside of the open market on the long side. On the short side, shorts can cover in the open market or wait out the premium decay until expiration then pay the difference, if any, of the warrant value (which is a direction function of the NNVC stock price despite having entirely different symbol and trading market).

4. Longs will feel like "free money" fell from the sky. They always do from gimmicky stock dividends, rights offerings, warrant dividends, etc.

5. Longs will get a rude awakening when the market quickly realizes these gimmicks are just thinly veiled dilution only it's a clever way to get Joe Sixpack to pay for it when smart won't. This is why you only see these gimmicks with failing companies and rarely to never with successful ones.

6. Be careful of someone claiming to have 53 years of successful investing going all in stocks and he still hasn't accumulated even $1 million yet.

7. No hedge funds are in control. NNVC has crashed since 2014 because NNVC failed at everything it said it would do. NNVC should be thanking its lucky stars it is still caring the bloated market cap it is.

8. The dude proudly admits to be in control of nearly 3 million shares or more than the nonexistent schizophrenic "short cabal" so why are all his attempts to upwardly manipulate failing so far? Why should anybody believe this senile fossil who is too much of a coward to reveal himself despite revealing the supposed institution he suckered in? Is this perhaps a last "what the hell, gotta try something" desperate move because "Wharton Business Group" is down many millions of dollars and is now threatening to sue for fraud?

[Rawnoc]

9. No hedge funds in the 1980s he said? Well thank goodness for Google in the year 2016 because it took me about 3 seconds to see that is just more bullshit:

"hedge fund history that began when Alfred Winslow Jones launched the first hedge fund in 1949"
"By 1968, there were some 140 hedge funds in operation"
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/mutualfund/05/hedgefundhist.asp#ixzz4SZJWBms2

10. No, a warrant isn't "a long-dated option, pure and simple. If it expires in one year or less, it is called an option; if any timeframe beyond that, a warrant."

Absolutely totally bullshit. Options are issued by 3rd parties -- anybody with an approved online brokerage account can "create" or "write" options. Warrants are only issued by the company itself. There is no requirement on when they expire. It could be in 2 months or it could be in 20 years. That's up to the company. In any case, warrants are always dilutive or at least potentially dilutive to the company issuing them. Options never are.

11. There is actually nothing that unusual about NNVC's short interest side. In fact, I would say it's kind of on the low side. All companies with any sort of liquidity that trade on a national exchange have a short position -- especially ones that also trade call and put options like NNVC does. In some cases some of the short shares are just hedged against call options and are actually owned by a bullish investor/trader.

[Rawnoc]

Last but not least the dumbest ideas the company could do is issue $6.05 warrants with a stock price barely hanging over $1.00.

Those warrants would be about 80% below being in the money and would trade for almost nothing.

The mythical $36 million in the God-awful example would only happen 5 years from now if the stock price is comfortably above $6.05. In much less years than that, NNVC will be completely bankrupt if it doesn't raise money in a more sane manner than this senile idea.

Shorts and the mythical "cabal" won't do anything but laugh and new shorts will be attracted. Nobody is going to give a shit about $6.05 worthless warrants on a $1.20 stock. Good grief lol is this for real? If issuing worthless warrants really helped a stock everybody would be doing it.

Usually warrants are just issued as a "sweetener" to an investment bank who buys deeply discounted dilutive shares. It's called a "sweetener" because they are just a gamble, at best, with little short term value. And those are warrants priced with a more enticing level such as say $1.50 warrants on a $1.20 stock. $6.05 warrants on a $1.20 stock? ROFL!!!!!!

[NewMoney]

We here at short cabal headquarters are not worried about that ancient failed strategy and will continue to drive this stock into the depths of hell simply because we can. That and it's just so much fun.

Resistance is futile.

[loanranger]

This idea was new to me. Not the idea of a company offering shareholders something for nothing....that wasn't new. But the warrant as a dividend idea. So I looked at the example provided at the very end of the message:
"The company LGL Group, Inc used warrant dividend in 2013------ lglgroup.com"

They DID issue such a warrant. It DID trade separately from the stock on the NYSE MKT exchange. A distinction appears to be that LGL Group didn't have a short interest issue that they were trying to fix with it. Instead they explained the action this way:
"Mr. Anderson commented, "We are pleased to return a portion of the Company's future value to our stockholders through this warrant dividend. We see this action as another step in our efforts to enhance stockholder value.""
The share price ahead of the announcement in June of 2013 was around $4 and the combined factors of the PERCEIVED value of the warrant dividend, an M&A deal purportedly in the works and the company's listing on NYSEMKT (with its required buying by the ETF's) acted to move the price to the $6 range in the following few months. They set the exercise price at $7.50, but the warrant couldn't be exercised for five years, except in certain circumstances (see Note).
(LGL had been around for decades at the time of the dividend, with ~$30M in revenues and a 1M loss in the previous year.)

Today (three and a half years later) the shares sell for $4.74 on VERY light volume (avg 1,282/day) and the warrants, which were also temporarily invigorated when they began trading by the same forces that moved the shares, haven't traded in a while. That shouldn't surprise anyone...they are basically worthless.

Whoever brought this proposal forward and provided the LGL example would best be ignored. It shares the same logic exhibited by the "if they get a new name and a new symbol all of the naked short sellers will be exposed" kind of thinking. It's a gimmick and a lousy gimmick at that.

Only one thing will make the short interest in NNVC shrink and that is operational progress. The shorts aren't holding the NNVC price back, NNVC management is.




Note:
"In the context of the Special Committee's ongoing strategic review process, the Board of Directors has revised the terms of the warrant dividend as follows: (i) each holder of the Company's common stock as of 4:30 p.m. ET on the record date, now July 29, 2013, will receive five warrants for each share of common stock owned, (ii) the warrants will be "European style warrants" and will only be exercisable on the earlier of (x) their expiration date, which will be the fifth anniversary of their issuance, and (y) such date that the 30-day volume weighted average price per share, or VWAP, of the Company's common stock is greater than or equal to $15.00, and (iii) 25 warrants will entitle their holder to purchase one share of the Company's common stock at an exercise price of $7.50. The Company intends for the warrants to be listed and traded on the NYSE MKT separately from the Company's common stock, subject to NYSE MKT approval. The warrants are expected to be issued on or around August 6, 2013, and in aggregate, will be exercisable for approximately 522,000 shares of the Company's common stock."
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/61004/000006100413000044/lgl8k_20130717.htm


ps. drrawmd65 covered this well...ignore him at your peril.
One last thought. Any time a company gives its shareholders anything....cash, stock, warrants, furniture....it simply takes value out of one pocket and puts it in another. There is no reason at all that someone with either a long or a short position should be motivated by such an action with one possible exception...it smacks of desperation and might draw the attention of short sellers who perceive that.