Hedge funds get information in advance in a variet
Post# of 72447
(Total Views: 258)
Posted On: 07/17/2019 2:52:46 PM
Hedge funds get information in advance in a variety of ways.
As I have posted here numerous times, there are well-documented stories of doctors, nurses, orderlies, secretaries, and even custodians being suborned to provide information on the progress of clinical trials. (In some cases, custodians accessed medical records, or medical professionals reported on the condition of the patients.) In one notable case, someone hired a private investigator to get license plates of cars parked outside a clinical trial site. After running the plates to see to whom they were registered, the investigators then went on Facebook to see if patients posted things like "feeling better today...." etc.
And then, of course, if you are negotiating a deal with a big pharma, how many people are there at that company who will see documents regarding this? How many of them can be bribed, or tell their brother-in-law or good friend who works for a hedge fund, what's going on? Not to mention people in the FDA who also might have non-public information.
I find it interesting, and telling, that some bashers are claiming that if information is leaked, it must be from IPIX -- and that if IPIX doesn't leak it, then there is no information leak. What hogwash. And hogwash that is intended for bashing, at that.
There are probably at least 25-50 times more people at other companies and agencies who have information about any negotiations than know from IPIX's end, and THEY, not IPIX management, would be the ones leaking the information. Remember, information leaks are contrary to the company's interests -- so if you're a large shareholder as all IPIX officers are, why in the world would you leak information?
But to say that because IPIX isn't leaking information, there is not information being leaked -- in the kindest interpretation, it is a fallacy propagated by the illogical. In the probable interpretation, it's just an intentional lie by bashers.
As I have posted here numerous times, there are well-documented stories of doctors, nurses, orderlies, secretaries, and even custodians being suborned to provide information on the progress of clinical trials. (In some cases, custodians accessed medical records, or medical professionals reported on the condition of the patients.) In one notable case, someone hired a private investigator to get license plates of cars parked outside a clinical trial site. After running the plates to see to whom they were registered, the investigators then went on Facebook to see if patients posted things like "feeling better today...." etc.
And then, of course, if you are negotiating a deal with a big pharma, how many people are there at that company who will see documents regarding this? How many of them can be bribed, or tell their brother-in-law or good friend who works for a hedge fund, what's going on? Not to mention people in the FDA who also might have non-public information.
I find it interesting, and telling, that some bashers are claiming that if information is leaked, it must be from IPIX -- and that if IPIX doesn't leak it, then there is no information leak. What hogwash. And hogwash that is intended for bashing, at that.
There are probably at least 25-50 times more people at other companies and agencies who have information about any negotiations than know from IPIX's end, and THEY, not IPIX management, would be the ones leaking the information. Remember, information leaks are contrary to the company's interests -- so if you're a large shareholder as all IPIX officers are, why in the world would you leak information?
But to say that because IPIX isn't leaking information, there is not information being leaked -- in the kindest interpretation, it is a fallacy propagated by the illogical. In the probable interpretation, it's just an intentional lie by bashers.
(5)
(0)