I've never met or had any dealings with Asensio, but you have to respect someone who will fight so hard for what he thinks is right, even if you disagree with his opinion.
Concerning the stock mentioned in the WSJ story, I suspect he is on the right side. A few years ago I met a fellow in his 40's who had been a very successful lawyer, but who was forced to retire due to chronic fatigue syndrome. A friend had recently given me the bullish pitch on Hemispherx, based on the supposed miracle drug it had to cure that problem. I asked him about it, and he knew all about it and was very enthusiastic. In fact, he was about to move to Canada, where he could be enrolled in a clinical trial of the drug, or just be prescribed it by a doctor who wasn't waiting for the official results.
A year or so later I ran in to him, and his opinion was the complete opposite - he felt that the drug was useless, and being a known CFS activist, had been in touch with many others who had tried it and found the same thing.
So Manny may be right, although I would never short a stock like that because, who knows? Maybe it doesn't work for CFS, but does for something else. When it comes to fraud stocks, I'd rather short the ones where the accounting is obviously crooked, the so called technology breaks the laws of physics, or where any knowledgeable business person can figure out that the company's model can't be achieved. Maybe it is just because I don't have a background in biology, but I think when looking for shorts I am better off trying to find a company that will fail than a medicine that won't work. |
