Sounds to me like the shorts have been selling their shares to institutions, probably unbeknownst to them. With the fact that the company is profitable, the shorts must be betting on a significant event to knock the price of the stock down substantially, as it doesn't appear they are relying on a successful clinical trial for their valuation, as with so many pharma stocks which are "betting it all" on one drug. As someone asked earlier, does the CEO have a murky past? It seems odd that shorts would target this company.
People often say that shorts do better research than longs, clearly there are scores of people who do better research than institutions, but in this case, with the shorts betting against both a significant number of institutions, and the insiders themselves who have been buyers, albeit at lower prices, along with the low float that now exists due to the extensive ownership, I think they may be painting themselves into a corner.
Kind of reminds me of NFI. <g> (NFI: Insiders own 67%, institutions own 57%, shorts own a lot of crying towels)
Carl |
