I really don't think we could have gotten a much m
Post# of 154055
(Total Views: 586)
Posted On: 09/01/2022 3:26:10 PM
Re: Evil Rabbit #128317
I really don't think we could have gotten a much more qualified head honcho. Cyrus has an MBA, a PhD in life sciences, experience in capital markets and pharma corporate development. Plus he's relatively young, not somebody with experience just putting in time at the end of their career.
That doesn't mean he'll automatically be a success of course but there is a level of experience that's far, far, far beyond what we had before, even if he doesn't have Nader's flair for the dramatic (from now on we'll be a regular boring pharma as far as PR goes). I think investors are somewhat underestimating just how big of a reclamation project the company was when Nader left, and still is to a very significant extent.
The recent price explosion may have skewed perspectives a little also because IMO it was a classic short squeeze. If you look at the borrow data for the last 6 months, it seems obvious to me that shorts decided it was a good idea to really jump on the stock in mid-June (when available to borrow dried up) then got caught when the rumors of a deal created buying pressure. Now the amount of shares available to borrow has gone back up and the fee to borrow is still elevated over "normal" levels, so shorting may not be quite as attractive at the moment. We've been fairly heavily shorted for most of the time I've owned the stock but in June shorts really piled on and paid the price, and it takes a serendipitous convergence of events for that to happen so dramatically.
That doesn't mean he'll automatically be a success of course but there is a level of experience that's far, far, far beyond what we had before, even if he doesn't have Nader's flair for the dramatic (from now on we'll be a regular boring pharma as far as PR goes). I think investors are somewhat underestimating just how big of a reclamation project the company was when Nader left, and still is to a very significant extent.
The recent price explosion may have skewed perspectives a little also because IMO it was a classic short squeeze. If you look at the borrow data for the last 6 months, it seems obvious to me that shorts decided it was a good idea to really jump on the stock in mid-June (when available to borrow dried up) then got caught when the rumors of a deal created buying pressure. Now the amount of shares available to borrow has gone back up and the fee to borrow is still elevated over "normal" levels, so shorting may not be quite as attractive at the moment. We've been fairly heavily shorted for most of the time I've owned the stock but in June shorts really piled on and paid the price, and it takes a serendipitous convergence of events for that to happen so dramatically.
(4)
(0)