Replies to post #163626 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[keep_trying]

PhoenixRising, I can relate to your comment about how the inquiries seeking to determine IDs of share holders is disturbing. I would sum the dynamic up as being a reminder to PPHM investors to not be "naive" about the current dynamics in play with various stake holder interests positioning around the implementation of any PPHM business plan.

I am wondering what difference it would make if the world knows the nature and size of my PPHM investment? I have already shared on this board how I bought initial shares over a decade ago at a much higher price in conjunction with that earlier run up to a post split equivalent to over $80 pps. I have been cost average improvement investing for years and have now built up a position that dominates my retirement investment portfolio, but is still relatively small in terms of what, from my point of view, carries much relevance for power brokering that might transpire if a party wished to partner, buy out or obstruct PPHM.

That said, I also recognize that I and some other long Retail investors who shared their investment situation on this board likely delivered the life line investing that allowed PPHM to weather through what I view as various assaults against the long term viability of PPHM the company. Considering those I care about that can benefit from Commercialization and delivery of the promising treatments brought forward by Dr. Thorpe's team and nurtured along by PPHM trials, retail investors have something to feel good about, even if PPHM investment value goes "plop". I consider a plop as being less likely now than pre September 2012, but surprises are always a possibility.

Finally, I recognize that my PPHM cost basis is likely higher, perhaps much higher, than that of more recent retail investor entrants. Consequently, there are likely much different expectations for what would be a satisfactory return from my decade plus of position building and holding compared to entrants at the $1 pps range investment that parties could have established after the September 21, 2012 pps crush that we experienced when PPHM announced that there had been discovery of miscoding of trial doses at the CRO for a critical Bavi trial.

My own point of view is that the miscoding event, regardless of the intent of the party that enacted it or enabled it, should receive little consideration with establishing the share holder value of PPHM the company, once the true technical performance from trials and PPHM technology value becomes public knowledge. If PPHM achieves treatments approved for commercial use or is positioned for likely achievement of same, treatments supporting valuation for a $7+ billion market cap company should deliver shareholder value reflected in the pps accordingly. If PPHM tech fails to deliver, investors should know that outcome would also be reflected in share price. What is the PPHM proper market cap, post Phase 3 trial results and post FDA decisions for commercial approval for PPHM tech? Investors should start that discovery process "soon" LOL!

Finally, why would any one care to know who I am, where I live and how many shares I own other than for "nosiness" or for investment advantaging mischief that I might enable by being naive about the handling of my investment?

Best wishes and IMO.
KT

[Protector]

PheonixRising, yes it is.

All due respect...BUT I find your post highly disturbing. If what you post is true(I assume it is) about "...at least one poster has been pressured..." and "...offer of support of many million shares..."

Still have some of the messages.

...then I personally am going to start asking questions.

I guess 'personally' is the keyword in this sentence. Any comments?

I do not accept 'back-alley propositions' and 'attempted manipulation of votes'(MY WORDS) as legitimate practices concerning a publicly traded company.

I am with you on this one. Reason why I declined. Knowing that I am quite a supporter of the BoD/management I never understood why that proposition was suggested to me. You would think you want a BoD critical person on such position and this besides the fact I never believe one can push such share-holders proposition through. It is even impossible to get 30 min Q&A on a quarterly or annual dedicated to retail share holders let alone a seat in the BoD.

It stinks IMO and it has NO place in any company,whether the company is aware of it or not. It is my right to investigate, and I will. Thanks for the info. PR

Absolutely. I think the company will not have anything to do with it. It sounds against there interest to add BoD members under share-holders pressure and members that don't bring anything to the table as could a KOL or an ex CEO of a BP, etc.

Oh, and while you investigate there is a second cluster of 10Milj shares that has made several attempts through a representative to get in contact more publicly with me and some other posters and under the witnessing eye of at least 15 posters on this board that have receive all the information at the same time.

Let us know if you have anything of interest. I never gave it much more attention except for warning people that there are attempts ongoing to get PPHM share-holders identities.