walldiver ....
Thank you for your typically informative post. I certainly don't dispute the events you describe, and accept the fact that negative analyst spin and programmed small lot trades can reduce share price ... temporarily.
But it’s been nearly two years since those events. Brean Murray and UBS are not the only sources of information. Sentiment is affected by many more factors than their opinions and their actions. Factors such as the Company’s actions and statements. We still languish in the low $4s (and Friday, barely).
Over the longer term, I think our $4 valuation reflects overall market sentiment based on far more than the actions (indeed, lies) of a few hedge funds and their allies.
I also don’t dispute that shorts may attempt to “cap” repeatedly when positive news develops. But again I think each effort would have only a temporary effect if the news is truly positive.
Rationally I must assume that shorts seek profits, not ideological warfare against DNDN shareholders or AIPC patients. At some point – in the face of truly positive news – it seems the numbers will become overwhelming and even temporary “capping” efforts will be futile. I think this was the crux of cattoe’s original question. At what news event will shorts begin to “pull up stakes,” in his words?
Your initial response was that announcement of Priority review would not cause shorts to retreat. Obviously they gamble on a level far beyond me, but surely such a notification would cause some hedging (no pun intended). The next big event will be seeing the Company’s presentation documents for the committee. Very little left behind the kimono at that point. If the presentation materials are extremely strong, how could any capping be effective? Beyond that, what’s left -- positive committee recommendation? Formal FDA approval? First US sales?
Thanks again for taking the time to respond so thoughtfully.
rkc
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
