I told libtards here how to make a quick 19% killing in the stock market...

[TomS]

...so, do you think they thanked me?

HELL NO! They either say it isn't possible or BLAMED ME for their inabilities to make a trade!!!

BTW, I ate my own cooking a made a VERY NICE PROFIT!!!!!

See "Waiting for forthright reflection" thread for details.

[-hh]

Translation:

Tom claimed to have gamboled on timing the Market and won, but provided no plausible proof.

When this lack of substantiation was noted, Tom backpedaled.



-hh

[Bigbird]

TomS wrote:

> ...so, do you think they thanked me?
>

I can also tell you how you could have done that multiple times in a
highly volatile market... without lying about it, like some demented
old fool.

--
President Trump made 12,019 false or misleading claims over 928 days
Pretending that doesn't bother you is a mental disorder.

[TomS]

Translation: "I am TOO STUPID to follow VERY EXPLICIT buy/sell signals of a SPECIFIC security!"

I ate my own cooking and made a handsome profit.

[TomS]

Hey Tweetybirdshit,

LOL!!!!

"I am whealy smart, but just can't get it out of my mouth"

No YOU CAN'T and NO YOU DIDN'T!!!

[TomS]

Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10% because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen (the libtards probably sold their shares!).

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...

That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.

> ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen

> (the libtards probably sold their shares!).

So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?

-hh

[TomS]

HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.

PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed! This will be forgotten within a week or two. The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least, the last 3 quarters.

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 2:14:12 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> TomS wrote:
>> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
>>
>> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
>>
>> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen
>> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
>>
>> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
>> Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?
>

> HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.

Dodge. You know what I meant.

> PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take
> OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed!
> This will be forgotten within a week or two.

Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...

> The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least,
> the last 3 quarters.

Before their correction, with a way too high P:E, plus a crash-dip back in
December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.


-hh

[Bigbird]

TomS wrote:

> On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 12:45:22 AM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
> > TomS wrote:
> >
> > > ...so, do you think they thanked me?
> > >
> >
> > I can also tell you how you could have done that multiple times in a
> > highly volatile market... without lying about it, like some demented
> > old fool.
> >
>

> "I am whealy smart, but just can't get it out of my mouth"
>

No, you really aren't. I see your spell checker is failing you.

> No and

Yes, really.

[TomS]

On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> TomS wrote:
> > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 2:14:12 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> >> TomS wrote:
> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
> >>
> >> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
> >>
> >> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen
> >> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
> >>
> >> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
> >> Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?
> >
> > HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.
>
> Dodge. You know what I meant.

No, I DON'T know what you "meant" - your mind is a DARK HOLE!

>
> > PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take
> > OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed!
> > This will be forgotten within a week or two.
>
> Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...

I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal (10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.

>
> > The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least,
> > the last 3 quarters.
>
> Before their correction, with a way too high P:E, plus a crash-dip back in
> December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.

That's a TOTALLY different conversation. The current PE, and all other financial factors, were already baked into the price - the drop was STRICTLY based on this ONE piece of bad news. PS, I can show DOZENS of companies with low PEs that are heading lower.

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> TomS wrote:
>> > -hh wrote:
>> >> TomS wrote:
>> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
>> >>
>> >> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
>> >>
>> >> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen
>> >> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
>> >>
>> >> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
>> >> Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?
>> >
>> > HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.
>>
>> Dodge. You know what I meant.
>
> No, I DON'T know what you "meant" - your mind is a DARK HOLE!

Lame insult attempt = fail.

>> > PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take
>> > OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed!
>> > This will be forgotten within a week or two.
>>
>> Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
>> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
>
> I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
>(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.

So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.

>> > The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least,
>> > the last 3 quarters.
>>
>> Before their correction, with a way too high P:E, plus a crash-dip back in
>> December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.
>
> That's a TOTALLY different conversation.

Not when you’ve already put money on the line. So then, what happened
and what’s the degree of relevance? And more to the point, why won’t it
happen again, at least in the relatively near term of your investment horizon?

> The current PE, and all other financial factors, were already baked into the
> price - the drop was STRICTLY based on this ONE piece of bad news.

That’s a belief in the market’s “invisible hand” being efficient, which has
repeatedly been disproven .. part since it is this very efficiently failure that
you’re claiming to be exploiting. Please try again.

> PS, I can show DOZENS of companies with low PEs that are heading lower.

Which is relevant to a company with a very high P:E ... how?

-hh

[Bigbird]

TomS wrote:

> On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > TomS wrote:
> > > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 2:14:12 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > >> TomS wrote:
> > >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
> > >>
> > >> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
> > >>
> > >> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request
> > by Amgen >> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
> > >>
> > >> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the
> > challenge fails? >> Or was there no real research and thus, you
> > have no real plan?
> > >

> > > - tomorrow is Y!!!! You don't do much

> > > trading.
> >
> > Dodge. You know what I meant.
>

> No, I know what you "meant" -

Confirming your reputation as a demented old fart.

[TomS]

On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 12:55:34 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> TomS wrote:
> > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> >> TomS wrote:
> >> > -hh wrote:
> >> >> TomS wrote:
> >> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
> >> >>
> >> >> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
> >> >>
> >> >> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen
> >> >> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
> >> >>
> >> >> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
> >> >> Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?
> >> >
> >> > HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.
> >>
> >> Dodge. You know what I meant.
> >
> > No, I DON'T know what you "meant" - your mind is a DARK HOLE!
>
> Lame insult attempt = fail.

Not an insult - it's the TRUTH!

>
> >> > PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take
> >> > OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed!
> >> > This will be forgotten within a week or two.
> >>
> >> Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
> >> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
> >
> > I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
> >(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.
>
> So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
> previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.

You obviously DON'T UNDERSTAND the basic concept: nobody can predict the future, BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities, which in this case that they will come back to their senses after a panic.

>
> >> > The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least,
> >> > the last 3 quarters.
> >>
> >> Before their correction, with a way too high P:E, plus a crash-dip back in
> >> December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.
> >
> > That's a TOTALLY different conversation.
>
> Not when you’ve already put money on the line. So then, what happened
> and what’s the degree of relevance? And more to the point, why won’t it
> happen again, at least in the relatively near term of your investment horizon?

That event CAN'T happen again - the PTO can only review it once, and that will take more than a year.

>
> > The current PE, and all other financial factors, were already baked into the
> > price - the drop was STRICTLY based on this ONE piece of bad news.
>
> That’s a belief in the market’s “invisible hand” being efficient, which has
> repeatedly been disproven .. part since it is this very efficiently failure that
> you’re claiming to be exploiting. Please try again.

Are you claiming that stock prices are totally random? Cite your "proof."

>
> > PS, I can show DOZENS of companies with low PEs that are heading lower.
>
> Which is relevant to a company with a very high P:E ... how?

ALXN doesn't have a high PE, in fact it is low for biotechs. PE is only ONE of many financial indicators in any case.

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
>On Saturday, August 31, 2019 at 12:55:34 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> TomS wrote:
>> > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> >> TomS wrote:
>> >> > -hh wrote:
>> >> >> TomS wrote:
>> >> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That’s a slightly better documentation than your prior attempts.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > ... because investors over-reacted to a patent review request by Amgen
>> >> >> > (the libtards probably sold their shares!).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So then what’s your plan? Sell tomorrow? Hold and hope the challenge fails?
>> >> >> Or was there no real research and thus, you have no real plan?
>> >> >
>> >> > HELLO - tomorrow is SATURDAY!!!! You OBVIOUSLY don't do much trading.
>> >>
>> >> Dodge. You know what I meant.
>> >
>> > No, I DON'T know what you "meant" - your mind is a DARK HOLE!
>>
>> Lame insult attempt = fail.
>
> Not an insult - it's the TRUTH!

No, it’s merely you making YA lame claim.

>> >> > PS - over-reactions are short term events and the patent review will take
>> >> > OVER A YEAR, and there is absolutely no reason to believe it will be reversed!
>> >> > This will be forgotten within a week or two.
>> >>
>> >> Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
>> >> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
>> >
>> > I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
>> >(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.
>>
>> So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
>> previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.
>
> You obviously DON'T UNDERSTAND the basic concept: nobody can predict the future,

Except as you just did, below:

> BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities, which in this case
> that they will come back to their senses after a panic.

Put your money down on Black and spin that roulette wheel! /s

>> >> > The company is VERY solid and has been beating estimates for, at least,
>> >> > the last 3 quarters.
>> >>
>> >> Before their correction, with a way too high P:E, plus a crash-dip back in
>> >> December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.
>> >
>> > That's a TOTALLY different conversation.
>>
>> Not when you’ve already put money on the line. So then, what happened
>> and what’s the degree of relevance? And more to the point, why won’t it
>> happen again, at least in the relatively near term of your investment horizon?
>

> That event CAN'T happen again - ...

Just what was the impetus of that drop? Not this patent review; that’s the point.
As such, if you don’t know, you can’t honestly claim it won’t happen again.

>> ... the PTO can only review it once, and that will take more than a year.

Each claim can be reviewed. How many claims are involved?

>> > The current PE, and all other financial factors, were already baked into the
>> > price - the drop was STRICTLY based on this ONE piece of bad news.
>>
>> That’s a belief in the market’s “invisible hand” being efficient, which has
>> repeatedly been disproven .. part since it is this very efficiently failure that
>> you’re claiming to be exploiting. Please try again.
>
> Are you claiming that stock prices are totally random? Cite your "proof."

No, that’s not what I’m claiming.

>> > PS, I can show DOZENS of companies with low PEs that are heading lower.
>>
>> Which is relevant to a company with a very high P:E ... how?
>
> ALXN doesn't have a high PE, in fact it is low for biotechs.

Check again; PE is typically high in speculative growth stocks.

> PE is only ONE of many financial indicators in any case.

But it’s the one you mentioned...

-hh

[-hh]

-hh wrote:
> > PE is only ONE of many financial indicators in any case.
>
> But it’s the one you mentioned...

Apologies, looked like I mentioned it first. But it
wasn’t the only factor I mentioned.

-hh

[TomS]

Hidin' Hughie,

WHY don't you TELL US what YOU are investing in???????????????????????

[-hh]

On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 10:23:21 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
>> ...

>
> WHY don't you TELL US what YOU are investing in???????????????????????

I already have ... to a greater degree than you have with all of your brag attempt.


-hh

[TomS]

NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-hh]

TomS trumpets:

> On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 3:14:37 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
>> On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 10:23:21 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >
>> > WHY don't you TELL US what YOU are investing in???????????????????????
> >
> > I already have ... to a greater degree than you have with all of your brag attempt.
>
>

> NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh poor boy, you’ve forgotten your loss with the /2019/ and /2019a/ again.
As well as others. Need the cites ... again?


-hh

[TomS]

You STILL haven't told us what you're invested in, and I don't think you EVER WILL! This is your MO - lie and deceit.

[-hh]

So then, are you requesting for me to provide the cites to document where I've
posted this before ... ?

... or are you just doing red-faced ranting?

Make up your mind Thomas.


-hh

[TomS]

Whatever you want to do...

[Bigbird]

TomS wrote:

> On Saturday, September 7, 2019 at 3:19:27 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 7, 2019 at 1:20:02 AM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
> > > On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 3:55:32 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > > > TomS trumpets:
> > > > > On Friday, September 6, 2019 at 3:14:37 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > > > >> On Thursday, September 5, 2019 at 10:23:21 PM UTC-4, TomS
> > > > wrote: >> >> ...
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > WHY don't you TELL US what YOU are investing
> > > > in???????????????????????
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I already have ... to a greater degree than you have with
> > > > > > all of your brag attempt.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > > >

> > > > Oh poor boy, you’ve forgotten your loss with the 2019 and 2019a

> > > > again. As well as others. Need the cites ... again?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -hh
> > >
> > > You STILL haven't told us what you're invested in, and I don't
> > > think you EVER WILL! This is your MO - lie and deceit.
> >
> >
> > So then, are you requesting for me to provide the cites to document
> > where I've posted this before ... ?
> >
> > ... or are you just doing red-faced ranting?
> >
> > Make up your mind Thomas.
> >
> >
> > -hh
>
> Whatever you want to do...

Lol, given a simple binary choice he still fails. What a loser. :)

[TomS]

I'm still waiting...

[Bigbird]

> I'm still waiting...

As is anyone who ever asked you to provide cites, sources or evidence
for your many, many falsehoods.

Even your dishonesty is tedious and predictable.

[TomS]

Hey Birdshit,

You're so PREDICTABLE that it is BORING!!! Sign of a retard.

[TomS]

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - sold ALXN with a GTC order at $110 (virtually the high of the day) at a TEN PERCENT profit in SIX DAYS!!!!!

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> -hh wrote:
> > TomS wrote:
> > > -hh wrote:
> > >> TomS wrote:
> > >> > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > >> >> TomS wrote:
>> >> >> > -hh wrote:
>> >> >> >> TomS wrote:
>> >> >> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
>>

>> >> >> …. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...

>> >> >> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
>> >> >
>> >> > I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
>> >> >(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.
>> >>
>> >> So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
>> >> previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.
>

> …

>
> MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - sold ALXN with a GTC order at $110 (virtually the
> high of the day) at a TEN PERCENT profit in SIX DAYS!!!!!

A bit short of 10%, actually, since (100.20 + 10%) is 110.22 & above your sell point.
As such, you’re at no better than 9-something percent (plus if your purchase was
small enough, transaction fees could have actually changed the gain into a net loss).

But still, it did appear to pan out in this case. Enjoy your gambling thrills.


-hh

[TomS]

On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 7:30:50 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> TomS wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> > > TomS wrote:
> > > > -hh wrote:
> > > >> TomS wrote:
> > > >> > On Friday, August 30, 2019 at 11:03:29 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > > >> >> TomS wrote:
> >> >> >> > -hh wrote:
> >> >> >> >> TomS wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > Just bought ALXN at 100.20 after it dropped over 10%...
> >>
> >> >> >> …. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
> >> >> >> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
> >> >> >(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.
> >> >>
> >> >> So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
> >> >> previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.
> >
> > …
> >
> > MISSION ACCOMPLISHED - sold ALXN with a GTC order at $110 (virtually the
> > high of the day) at a TEN PERCENT profit in SIX DAYS!!!!!
>
> A bit short of 10%, actually, since (100.20 + 10%) is 110.22 & above your sell point.
> As such, you’re at no better than 9-something percent (plus if your purchase was
> small enough, transaction fees could have actually changed the gain into a net loss).
>
> But still, it did appear to pan out in this case. Enjoy your gambling thrills.
>
>
> -hh

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

Only you would call a 9.75% gain a "9 - something" gain!!!!

And, it's NOT GAMBLING: I clearly explained to you the rational behind this trade. And, it's not a "one-off" event: it occurs TIME AND TIME AGAIN! You consider this to be throwing the dice - this couldn't be FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!!!

Who knows WHAT you invest in, but this I can tell you: you KNOW NOTHING ABOUT INVESTING!!!!!!!!!!!

[TomS]

And, now, the gain you could have had is up to THIRTY FOUR PERCENT!!!!!

[Alan Baker]

So then you're admitting you sold too soon?

[Bigbird]

TomS wrote:

> On Monday, September 9, 2019 at 2:03:50 AM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
> >
> > Even your dishonesty is tedious and predictable.
> >
>

> You're so that it is Sign of a retard.

Yawn!

See above.

I assume it's tattooed on your lizard like forehead then. :)

[-hh]

> >> Only you would call a 9.75% gain a "9 - something" gain!!!!

Sorry, "nine POINT something", and even if you calculated it as 9.75%, that's still quite
clearly short of your declared goal.

> >> And, it's NOT GAMBLING: I clearly explained to you the rational behind this trade.
> > > And, it's not a "one-off" event: it occurs TIME AND TIME AGAIN! You consider this
> > > to be throwing the dice - this couldn't be FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!!!

Denial, despite:

"BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities..."
^^^^^

> >> Who knows WHAT you invest in, but this I can tell you: you KNOW NOTHING
> > > ABOUT INVESTING!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > And, now, the gain you could have had is up to THIRTY FOUR PERCENT!!!!!
>
> So then you're admitting you sold too soon?

Or 'chickened out', because he knows that its gambling on the odds.


-hh

[TomS]

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

You were the one saying that this was a TERRIBLE investment, not that I would fall short by a QUARTER OF A PERCENT! Were you the one advising ALXN investors to SELL on this inconsequential news? Probably so.

I set a predetermined sell point that met my expectations and placed a GTC limit order on that price. It went EXACTLY as I expected and I am VERY HAPPY with the result. You nay-sayers are left scratching your butts trying to dis what was a very successful swing trade. If I sent you idiots silver bullion you would sneer and say "But this isn't GOLD!"

So far, I have given you, free of charge, trades that would have realized you a total of THIRTY FOUR PERCENT gain, and all you do is BITCH!!!!!!!

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> Alan wrote:
>> > TomS wrote:
> …

>> > >>> A bit short of 10%, actually, since (100.20 + 10%) is 110.22 & above your sell point.
>> > >>> As such, you’re at no better than 9-something percent (plus if your purchase was
>> > >>> small enough, transaction fees could have actually changed the gain into a net loss).
>> > >>>
>> > >>> But still, it did appear to pan out in this case. Enjoy your gambling thrills.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> Only you would call a 9.75% gain a "9 - something" gain!!!!
>>
>> Sorry, "nine POINT something", and even if you calculated it as 9.75%, that's still quite
>> clearly short of your declared goal.
>>

>> > >> And, it's NOT GAMBLING: I …

>>
>> Denial, despite:
>>
>> "BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities..."
>> ^^^^^
>>

>> > > And, now, the gain you could have had is up to THIRTY FOUR PERCENT!!!!!
>> >
>> > So then you're admitting you sold too soon?
>>
>> Or 'chickened out', because he knows that its gambling on the odds.
>
>

> You were the one saying that this was a TERRIBLE investment,...

False. I identified risk while you initially claimed that you weren’t gambling.

> not that I would fall short by a QUARTER OF A PERCENT!

False. You made a claim for your plan, which you then admitted that you fell short of.

> I set a predetermined sell point that met my expectations and placed a GTC limit order on that price.

If right after you bought that you had previously said “sell at 110, which
is roughly 10% gain”, you would be credible. You didn’t.

> So far, I have given you, free of charge, trades that would have realized you a
> total of THIRTY FOUR PERCENT gain, and all you do is BITCH!!!!!!!

So? I gave you a free tip which would have delivered a 50% gain faster.
Because as per your narrative, the risk levels don’t matter. That’s why
even you, after your initial denial, admitted that you had merely made a bet.

For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.

-hh

[TomS]

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 4:11:42 AM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> TomS wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> >> Alan wrote:
> >> > TomS wrote:
> > …
> >> > >>> A bit short of 10%, actually, since (100.20 + 10%) is 110.22 & above your sell point.
> >> > >>> As such, you’re at no better than 9-something percent (plus if your purchase was
> >> > >>> small enough, transaction fees could have actually changed the gain into a net loss).
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> But still, it did appear to pan out in this case. Enjoy your gambling thrills.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Only you would call a 9.75% gain a "9 - something" gain!!!!
> >>
> >> Sorry, "nine POINT something", and even if you calculated it as 9.75%, that's still quite
> >> clearly short of your declared goal.
> >>
> >> > >> And, it's NOT GAMBLING: I …
> >>
> >> Denial, despite:
> >>
> >> "BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities..."
> >> ^^^^^
> >>
> >> > > And, now, the gain you could have had is up to THIRTY FOUR PERCENT!!!!!
> >> >
> >> > So then you're admitting you sold too soon?
> >>
> >> Or 'chickened out', because he knows that its gambling on the odds.
> >
> >
> > You were the one saying that this was a TERRIBLE investment,...
>
> False. I identified risk while you initially claimed that you weren’t gambling.

TRUE - you said it was over-valued and compared it, unfavorably, to gambling.

>
> > not that I would fall short by a QUARTER OF A PERCENT!
>
> False. You made a claim for your plan, which you then admitted that you fell short of.

TRUE - I NEVER stated that, just that this was a great opportunity. YOU asked what a decent return would be, and I gave you an EXAMPLE. Every situation has to be evaluated dynamically, and I determined that a sell point of 110 was feasible. This met the criteria of "getting back to normal," which I ROUNDED to 10%. It is UNBELIEVABLE that you idiots are trying to argue that my plan FAILED when it, in fact, SUCCEEDED! Speaks to how libtards view the world, which is pathetically!!

>
> > I set a predetermined sell point that met my expectations and placed a GTC limit order on that price.
>
> If right after you bought that you had previously said “sell at 110, which
> is roughly 10% gain”, you would be credible. You didn’t.
>
> > So far, I have given you, free of charge, trades that would have realized you a
> > total of THIRTY FOUR PERCENT gain, and all you do is BITCH!!!!!!!
>
> So? I gave you a free tip which would have delivered a 50% gain faster.
> Because as per your narrative, the risk levels don’t matter. That’s why
> even you, after your initial denial, admitted that you had merely made a bet.

I don't recall such a "tip" - if you said anything, it was unactionable.

>
> For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.

Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, missed last two earnings estimates, stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> TomS wrote:
>> > -hh wrote:
>> >> Alan wrote:
>> >> > TomS wrote:
>> > …

>> >> > >>> A bit short of 10%, actually, since (100.20 + 10%) is 110.22 & above your sell point...

>> >> > >> And, it's NOT GAMBLING: I …
>> >>
>> >> Denial, despite:
>> >>
>> >> "BUT you can observe human behavior and bet on the probabilities..."
>> >> ^^^^^

Silence from Thomas.

>> >> ... 'chickened out', because he knows that its gambling on the odds.

>> >
>> > You were the one saying that this was a TERRIBLE investment,...
>>
>> False. I identified risk while you initially claimed that you weren’t gambling.
>
> TRUE - you said it was over-valued and compared it, unfavorably, to gambling.

I asked about a similar crash as a risk:

-hh>> a crash-dip back in December (lower than this one) which prompts looking into why. Good luck.
TS>
TS> That's a TOTALLY different conversation.
(Continued):
TS> That event CAN'T happen again - ...

They’ve still had *two* such shock crashes within twelve months.

>> > not that I would fall short by a QUARTER OF A PERCENT!
>>
>> False. You made a claim for your plan, which you then admitted that you fell short of.
>
> TRUE - I NEVER stated that, just that this was a great opportunity. YOU asked what
> a decent return would be, and I gave you an EXAMPLE.

No, I asked what your specific plan was:

-hh >>> Vague. So then your plan is to sell at ... what price? ...
-hh >>> And similarly, in what timeframe ... within a week? ...
TS >>
TS >> I already told you: a week or two. Just getting back to normal
TS >>(10% gain) is quite acceptable to me.
-hh>
-hh> So then you’re predicting that it will be at least 10% above your
-hh> previously listed buy price within ~two weeks, at which point you’ll sell.

You didn’t say that that articulation was in any way wrong. You later chickened out.

> Every situation has to be evaluated dynamically, and I determined that a sell

> point of 110 was feasible. This met the criteria of "getting back to normal,"..

“Normal”? Even though just two weeks before you bought ALXN was at 123.49,
which is 12% higher than your “+10%” of 110? And even though for most days
over the past six months it had been higher than 120? Interesting.

>> > I set a predetermined sell point that met my expectations and placed a GTC limit order on that price.
>>
>> If right after you bought that you had previously said “sell at 110, which
>> is roughly 10% gain”, you would be credible. You didn’t.

YA example of Tom with his documentation failures.

>> > So far, I have given you, free of charge, trades that would have realized you a
>> > total of THIRTY FOUR PERCENT gain, and all you do is BITCH!!!!!!!
>>
>> So? I gave you a free tip which would have delivered a 50% gain faster.
>> Because as per your narrative, the risk levels don’t matter. That’s why
>> even you, after your initial denial, admitted that you had merely made a bet.
>
> I don't recall such a "tip" - if you said anything, it was unactionable.

“Put your money down on Black and spin that roulette wheel!”

>> For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
>

> Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, ...

Incorrect - Lorcaserin, is FDA approved and on sale the USA.
They have some sales in Asia and have been working on EU.

> ...missed last two earnings estimates,...

Context. Look at the two quarters before, and then back at the 1Q spike.

> > ...stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.

Most have ‘sell’? Really? Just who is saying that? Cite, please.

Because:
<https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/arna/analystestimates>
Has its analyst reports as: 9 Buy,1 Hold, 0 Sell (9-1-0).

Similarly,
<https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ARNA/analysis?p=ARNA>
...has no sells either: 4-3-0.

Seems that there is a lot of long term interest on their development pipeline.

-hh

[TomS]

LOL!!!

You just CAN'T STAND SUCCESS, can you? And, THEN, you put up that loser ARNA!! Don't you KNOW that they have MISSED their last to earnings estimates, AND they are LOSING MONEY? Obviously not - that is WHY their stock is tanking, it DESERVES TO! And look at the Profitability column: it is nothing but NEGATIVE! And they have been LOSING MONEY for each of the last five years, whereas ALXN has been profitable every year. And it fails my prinicpal criteria: a sudden unexpected event to which investors have overreacted. But, by all means, STOCK UP on ARNA. Tell me, what is your PLAN, are you even BUYING IT (or are you just trying to trick me into making a bad investment)?

"Gambling" is what you do in Vegas - and the house has the odds. You just PISSED because you missed TWO great opportunities to make a killing, and BLEW IT!!! I guess you buy the Dim bullshit that the economy is tanking.

[-hh]

TomS wrote:
> -hh wrote:
>> TomS wrote:
>> > -hh wrote:
>> >> For example, let’s hear your investment prognosis on another pharma, ARNA.
>> >
>> > Would not touch ARNA - no products for sale, ...
>>
>> Incorrect - Lorcaserin, is FDA approved and on sale the USA.
>> They have some sales in Asia and have been working on EU.

Silence from Tom.

>> > ...missed last two earnings estimates,...
>>
>> Context. Look at the two quarters before, and then back at the 1Q spike.

Ibid.

>> > > ...stock chart looks horrible, and analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it.
>>
>> Most have ‘sell’? Really? Just who is saying that? Cite, please.
>>
>> Because:
>> <https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/arna/analystestimates>
>> Has its analyst reports as: 9 Buy,1 Hold, 0 Sell (9-1-0).
>>
>> Similarly,
>> <https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/ARNA/analysis?p=ARNA>
>> ...has no sells either: 4-3-0.

Ibid.

>> Seems that there is a lot of long term interest on their development pipeline.
>

>Don't you KNOW that they have MISSED their last to earnings estimates,
> AND they are LOSING MONEY?

Yes, and since their business model isn’t in manufacturing, they are expected to
have ongoing losses until they have a new drug to sell off...so what’s your point?

> Obviously not - that is WHY their stock is tanking, it DESERVES TO! And
> look at the Profitability column: it is nothing but NEGATIVE!

Where “tanking” is a price that’s currently up more than +25% to date in 2019,
and up +300% over the past three years.

> And they have been LOSING MONEY for each of the last five years,

One can go a several quarters at a $35M-$50M loss when there’s then
the payoff of a $700M sale...such as what just happened in 1Q19.

> And it fails my prinicpal criteria: a sudden unexpected event to which
> investors have overreacted.

Which merely means you’re just a ‘day trader’ type making bets.

> But, by all means, STOCK UP on ARNA. Tell me, what is your PLAN, are you
> even BUYING IT (or are you just trying to trick me into making a bad investment)?

Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find it interesting
that the stock has such consistent buy recommendations despite what looks
like nothing much, and has a lot of institutionals holding it. The question seems
to be if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to $500.
Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby...

-hh

[TomS]

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

There is only ONE question left: how much ARNA did you buy?

[-hh]

On Monday, September 16, 2019 at 3:41:40 PM UTC-4, TomS wrote:
> On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 7:04:16 PM UTC-7, -hh wrote:
> > TomS wrote:

> > > ...

> > Oh, you’ve already made it obvious that you don’t hold. I find
> > it interesting that the stock has such consistent buy
> > recommendations despite what looks like nothing much, and has
> > a lot of institutionals holding it. The question seems to be
> > if they go on a tear of product approvals to sell and it pops to $500.
> > Even so, a +300% (paper) gain over the past three years isn’t too shabby...
> >
> > -hh
>
> Hey Hidin' Hughie,
>
> There is only ONE question left: how much ARNA did you buy?

Incorrect, for there's older questions still lacking answers:

Tom claimed that the company has no products for sale, which
is incorrect (they at least have FDA-approved Lorcaserin), so
how is it that Tom got such a basic verifiable fact so wrong?

Tom claimed "analysts mostly have SELL ratings on it" which
was challenged because of multiple sources showing zero sells
(and more buys than holds), so where's the proof?

Tom claimed "...their stock is tanking," while it is up +25%
for the year and +300% over the past three years, so just how
is that a credible description of a stock that's "tanking"?

Tom claimed that I was trying to trick him into making a bad
investment, but how is that possible when there were no buy
suggestions/recommendations made?


-hh

[TomS]

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-hh]

Gosh, Tom: the answer is quite simple: "You First".


-hh

[TomS]

Hey Hidin' Hughie,

It's YOUR pick - don't you even believe in YOU OWN LIES????

Your non-answer IS the answer: you didn't buy SHIT because you don't HAVE SHIT!!!!