Replies to post #80826 on NanoViricides Inc. (NNVC)

[Puffer]

Last I looked the author was still putting up negative responses in the comments section, so that would also lead me to think otherwise.

[JG36]

Note that there are 699 puts out on the Feb 22 $2.50 contract. I suspect that there may be a concerted effort in the next few days (by the perpetrators of the SA piece) to get the stock below that strike price.

You can't tell from the number of outstanding puts who bought and who sold. If traders bought those puts then yes, they are betting that NNVC will tank further. But it's just as likely that some investors sold those puts, hoping to get cheap shares (and getting paid if they don't). Selling a 2.50 put for 0.25 means that so long as the shares are below 2.50 on the expiration day you get the shares for the bargain price of 2.50 - .25 = 2.25. I've been thinking of making that trade myself. Whichever is the case, the option market makers on the other side of the trade don't care which way the stock price goes -- they delta hedge out the directional risk and just make the bid/ask spread.

[I Need Help]

At close on Friday there were 1,041,800 shares short (shortsqueeze.com). Sounds higher than normal (average), but not exceptionally so.

If I were the bear raiders, I would have tried to get out the first or second day on big, big, dips. Not as easy as it sounds without moving the market in the wrong direction for them.

My belief is that they are not done with NNVC, and will be in and out of the market. The increased volatility may in itself have an overall negative effect on the share price. Active traders will like the environment, but not longer-term investors.

It would be nice if big institutions moved in to support NNVC. Some who have done due diligence on NNVC may decide to buy on weakness. Must seem like a bargain to some, and some may want to defend their current position. All this is highly speculative guessing on my part. Trading will tell in the next week or two.

Being long, I would prefer to see a larger current short interest. Shorts eventually buy to cover, and that drives the price higher. Longs get hurt when new shorting is actively taking place. This brings selling into the current market, and softens the price. So a larger current short interest is a positive for longs and a smaller current short interest a negative.

I mostly agree with your statement, "I'm still convinced they are already out." The involved parties have already made a killing. I think they will continue to milk the volatility. Plus, I'm sure they will try a repeat of their initial success if they can get away with it. It will probably be a bit harder each subsequent time, as long as the company defends itself positively in the eyes of the market. Shorts want to poison the well with blood in the water. The company wants to purify the water. It's not over. It also takes awhile for bear raiders to reload, and the next time eyes may be on their activities. They definitely won't be able to pull another stealth attack like they pulled off last week (at least not for several months).