Dave, your explanation sounds more like jealousy than critical thinking. The management advantage of being awarded options occurs in every public company. It is a sweet deal, and it encourages them to run the company well and to be successful. Options are worthless if the company doesn't succeed. If our management team achieves $2 share price in the market, they win, and any shareholder who still holds shares wins... well, maybe not so much for the guy who buys at $1.90 on the way up.
I disagree that someone who paid for their shares with cash has any more at risk than someone who was awarded options. Look at John Commissiong. He owns 20M shares. He hasn't purchased shares in the secondary market since the company was formed, but you have no idea how much of his own or Gerald's money went into the formation of this company. There's a reason they were awarded shares from day one. John's life's work is in this company. For you to suggest they have less at risk than the average retail investor is ridiculously self serving and misguided.
I dont agree with your statement that management doesn't care about short term problems. One of management's concerns is shareholder sentiment. But their focus is on long term value and success of the company, and value for the long-term shareholders. They aren't going to make business decisions to satisfy the short-term speculator or trader.
I disagree that someone who paid for their shares with cash has any more at risk than someone who was awarded options. Look at John Commissiong. He owns 20M shares. He hasn't purchased shares in the secondary market since the company was formed, but you have no idea how much of his own or Gerald's money went into the formation of this company. There's a reason they were awarded shares from day one. John's life's work is in this company. For you to suggest they have less at risk than the average retail investor is ridiculously self serving and misguided.
Bad argument. Seriously bad. One, it's impossible for management to know this, just as it is for retail investors. They may believe it, and if they do, they buy shares, just as our CEO and CFO and many other shareholders have done. Let me ask you this, Dave. If you could buy a winning lottery ticket right now, but you had to wait 5-10 years for the payout, would you buy it? Tickets cost $20K each, and you are allowed to buy multiple tickets. How many would you buy? Would you take on a second job just for the opportunity of buying more of these tickets? Or are you one of these people who look at the PowerBall $10M starting jackpot (after someone won $300M last week) and remark, "$10M isn't worth me buying a ticket." Or perhaps you decline because of the missed "opportunity costs" of having to wait 5-10 years. That kind of reasoning baffles me.Quote:These top management don't care about short term problems with the stock. They know in 10 years they will be kazillionaires.
I dont agree with your statement that management doesn't care about short term problems. One of management's concerns is shareholder sentiment. But their focus is on long term value and success of the company, and value for the long-term shareholders. They aren't going to make business decisions to satisfy the short-term speculator or trader.
If your investment time frame here was in the 2 to 3 year range when you invested, then you're not an investor, and certainly not a long-term investor as you claim. You're a speculator. It never ceases to amaze me how many "investors" get confused over this. Go to any financial planner who has the CFP certification (not easy to get and signifies they actually know what they're talking about) and ask them about investing in stocks. They'll tell you that you should only invest in equities with an outlook of 5 years or longer, because in the short term, stocks are volatile and you may lose money if you need to sell. They'll tell you to only invest money you can leave alone for the long term. They'll tell you it's not smart to invest your emergency fund in stocks, or even in mutual funds. But we continue to see people doing these dumb things and calling themselves investors instead of speculators. There's a reason an extremely high percentage of day traders lose money overall. They are speculators and this entails extreme risk. If you invested in a pre-revenue biotech company with a 2 to 3 year time frame believing it was an investment, then you're the fool. It's not management's job to make you money. It's their job to manage the company and build it into a world leader biotech company. If your expectation of that happening is 2 to 3 years from your investment point, you're delusional. All of the critical thinking in the world won't help you. Maybe you should have a glass of the Kool Aid, not the stuff you've been drinking all this time.Quote:But for those who invested based on Gerald's statements and guidance, this has been a very disappointing year. And if your time frame is more in the 2 to 3 year range.....then this becomes an even bigger disappointment. Many speculators chose AMBS over other stocks that have gone up much more over the past year. (Opportunity Costs) So they consider this past 1.5 years as a bust. But not for you, apparently.
