Hi Cal, everyone - Stimulating discussions today!
"Until the results are published, investors can only use tools and indicators. Our DD is to place probabilities along that range. The more DMX releases about the WF10, ie intention to buy out OXO, the bulk of probabilities shift with new info towards the marginal to good range."
The assumption here is that Rebecca and the BOD are making intelligent, rational decisions. If that premise is correct (let it be!), then the inference that WF10 looks good is also correct.
As others have pointed out, there are some caveats with the Oxo purchase, and the acquisition has been built with escape hatches.
Moreover, there are some associated signs that WF10 may not be the hot, hot product that we have speculated on; chief among these (IMO) is the lack of buying pressure. I (personally) do not believe that such a large P3 could have phenomenal results without some "leakage" - OTOH, it is a difficult P3, as pointed out.
Again, by inference, my conclusion about the NASDAQ listing was based on an expectation of WF10 results. The premise is the same: that we are dealing with intelligent, rational management.
Anyone who thinks that listing successfully on NASDAQ is possible, without stellar WF10 results, and a successful Pennsaid introduction, is mistaken.
That said, I have found that management "teams" are often constitutionally incapable of assessing correctly the true future of their steps. The probability of that failing, IMO, is increased when leadership is more autocratic, and non-consensual.
We have conflicting signs. The Acqua activity, however justified, masks some potential indicators.
The Q2 results were a predictable non-event; we continue to put a finger to the wind, glance anxiously at the sky, and wait for news.
Best regards.
Jim |
