RE:RE:SVA should be trading at $3.40 minimum
Metalsguy1 wrote:
steadfast I have given up on the idea that management actually listens here. They are luke a mule pulling the cart that ignores the whip of investor concerns. I would not even call the current SP a breakout because right now it looks like a failed breakout. Crossing 1.50 should have formed a new string level of support but as I said the volume that got us over that just wasn't good enough and we would drift down. It's the holiday season...the chances of news before year end are dwindling as will that share price will as well. The noobs will continue to chatter with excitement the rest of us have been here long enough to know better. There was a time I would have said 3 or 4 a share was conservative but with the glacial progress... who knows
In 24 months, if no adverse events and conformal coating tests well underway, the leverage will definitely be there to extract $3-4 per share. The problem that SF and MS and you, know, is the legacy relationship between the board, the business development guy in charge, and the IR gamesmanship that has gone on forever.
FOMO when something does get announced is real. So is the trading manipulation by our co-investees. So is the way the board at the last AGM feathered their bed in anticipation of deals in the future before there is any ink applied to a contract that confirms the company's ability to make real its claims about a cure across populations.
Turning the science into money. That is what all of us doubters wonder about. What I see is some guys who've known one another for a while, closing ranks when we investors question their inability to montetize in ways other than pump&dump. We, the cash infusers, should not give them another calendar year after the next AGM. Either they monetize, or we vote to make substantial changes going forward.
DF