|
|
Post by jonny80s on Sept 8, 2016 6:24:31 GMT -5
In the last week Fidelity's equity score for mnkd jumped from .3 (extremely bearish) to 3.3 (low end of neutral). The last time this happened the stock ran up about 75% before heading south again. Should be an interesting couple of weeks.
|
|
|
|
Post by avichen on Sept 8, 2016 6:26:37 GMT -5
I personally thinks that you're trying to pump n dump this...
|
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Sept 8, 2016 6:51:41 GMT -5
I think it is a bit more than a coincidence that financial analysts are reversing their stance on equity price for the same period that management had previously stated they expect to see a rise in the script count. If the stock shoots back to $3 I may consider a fractional dump, otherwise.... let it ride.
|
|
|
|
Post by kbrion77 on Sept 8, 2016 6:58:18 GMT -5
I think it is a bit more than a coincidence that financial analysts are reversing their stance on equity price for the same period that management had previously stated they expect to see a rise in the script count. If the stock shoots back to $3 I may consider a fractional dump, otherwise.... let it ride.That's what we call a sound investment strategy! |
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Sept 8, 2016 8:50:36 GMT -5
Investment strategy.... good one. Anyone with an investment strategy wouldn't allocate more than 5% to a highly speculative biotech such as mnkd.
Now, if you would have stated "trading strategy" I would take your comment seriously. Did you load up in the .70-.80 range? At $3.... that would be a 4 bagger. Is $3 plausible in the next 3-4 weeks, not really. But, $1.5-2 is.
To each their own.
|
|
|
|
Post by od on Sept 8, 2016 9:05:36 GMT -5
Investment strategy.... good one. Anyone with an investment strategy wouldn't allocate more than 5% to a highly speculative biotech such as mnkd. Now, if you would have stated "trading strategy" I would take your comment seriously. Did you load up in the .70-.80 range? At $3.... that would be a 4 bagger. Is $3 plausible in the next 3-4 weeks, not really. But, $1.5-2 is. To each their own. J, Help me out here --- 'in the next 3-4 weeks' why is '$1.5-2' any more plausible than '$3' or plausible at all? I did 'load up in the .70-.80 range', but as an investment, not a trade. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Sept 8, 2016 10:34:06 GMT -5
Look at March. With no catalyst mnkd went from $1-2.2. That stock was way oversold combined with short covering. With a script # bump catalyst, a payment from Receptor, more covering and who knows what else..... what could happen?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2016 13:16:08 GMT -5
Look at March. With no catalyst mnkd went from $1-2.2. That stock was way oversold combined with short covering. With a script # bump catalyst, a payment from Receptor, more covering and who knows what else..... what could happen? You are incorrect. I sold at $1 instead of the $2.20 mark so I know this stretch as it still stings me when I think about it. Interactive brokers bumped up their interest over a 100% to borrow short shares. There was no room in that trade to make money at that share price at the borrowing rate. That was a short squeeze with a very big catalyst, and then once they lowered the interest back down what happened. it was shorted to shit again. |
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Sept 8, 2016 13:21:15 GMT -5
I personally thinks that you're trying to pump n dump this... avi, how can one guy here at this board be effective in pumping the share price? |
|
|
|
Post by anderson on Sept 8, 2016 18:57:40 GMT -5
I personally thinks that you're trying to pump n dump this... avi, how can one guy here at this board be effective in pumping the share price? You forget Mike C is a member of this board. He could be effective at pumping, but that probably would lead to legal trouble for him so he wouldn't do it. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Sept 8, 2016 21:34:13 GMT -5
avi, how can one guy here at this board be effective in pumping the share price? You forget Mike C is a member of this board. He could be effective at pumping, but that probably would lead to legal trouble for him so he wouldn't do it. And for all of us...it's also like being in a reality show and forgetting the cameras are always watching:-) |
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Sept 9, 2016 5:31:55 GMT -5
avi, how can one guy here at this board be effective in pumping the share price? You forget Mike C is a member of this board. He could be effective at pumping, but that probably would lead to legal trouble for him so he wouldn't do it. Sure, some CEO do it regularly. I recall the CEO of one of the retailer's traps, PLUG. He is a pure show man. I recall that Mike spoke about early indicators that show him that scripts are recovering. Such statements are fine, I guess, as they are factual and he stated them in a CC. Any stuff that anticipates events that are not set in stone are dangerous. Hakan did that once and he got fired as CEO. |
|
|
|
Post by jonny80s on Sept 19, 2016 5:58:06 GMT -5
Fidelity's equity score is now up to 5.2. Something is coming....
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Sept 19, 2016 7:48:56 GMT -5
Fidelity's equity score is now up to 5.2. Something is coming.... It doesn't work like that. It is a weighted average of analyst outlooks so the number can change for various reasons not related to the stock. The most likely one is that they have changed their view of an analyst's accuracy, or an analyst has stopped covering the stock long enough ago to drop off their calculations. Starmine - Fidelity Equity Summary Score |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Sept 19, 2016 8:06:29 GMT -5
One reason can simply be that the stock price is in a funk. If an analyst values the company at $XXX million and the share price is $1.50, that might trigger a sell recommendation. The same company with the same $XXX million valuation with shares trading at 70 cents might be a buy simply because the price has gone down.
A lot of times the valuations only get updated once or twice a year, because doing a proper valuation job is a major effort, while share prices bounce around constantly. A professional healthcare analyst wouldn't do it that way, but there are very few that really know what they are doing. The others have to keep forecasts updated on hundreds of biotech companies, without the time and staff needed to do it properly, so they have to take a few shortcuts. Since Zacks and other composite analyst scores are a mix of good and bad analysts, never put much faith into those numbers.
|
|
