Gdepc – Q. Which is more accurate a broken watch or one that is five minutes behind? Ans. The broken watch is more accurate because it will be correct twice a day while the improperly set watch will never be correct.
Forever implying that this stock price will go up without a time frame is like the broken watch. When the time comes that makes that watch correct, it doesn’t mean that the watch was correct all along. Like the broken watch, when, or if, the stock goes up it will only mean that your assertion that the price would rise – eventually - would be correct at that moment but it won’t mean that you were correct all along.
Q. Which watch would you rather have? A. The one that is five minutes behind because the information it provides can be interpreted and acted upon.
Here are some examples. Which is more useful?
There will be another major hurricane New Orleans – eventually
or
There are no current tropical depressions in the Atlantic and a storm in New Orleans is unlikely over the next two weeks.
The first statement will be correct someday – but the second one give information that can be interpreted and acted on.
How about these?
The stock is going to the moon
or
The latest CEO update shows a longer timeframe for the IND submissions than the previous sources, which could indicate a delay in product commercialization.
You don’t have to reply because we all know what your answer would be – but can you at least give an accurate launch date this time? I'm not talking about the year end blitz followed by the now predictable retrace. That’s too easy. How about giving us the real time frames for ribbon cutting ceremony of the cGMP production facility (not the pilot), the first IND submission, or the first commercial synDNA product release(cooperative or in-house)? Get any of those right and it still won’t make you correct all along but it should be good enough for Arnold to cut you some slack on the last stock prediction game results.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
