tonyt, LGND Loss 35 cents vs Loss 32 cents est Loss 28 cents.
Thank you for catching that. Anyone reading my post would have scratched his head if not for your correction. Hopefully, most were familiar with the report, and understood my omission of the word 'Loss' in each case.
My point was that the news was bad - not good. Starting with the earnings results of a Loss of 35 cents vs ests averaging a Loss of 28 cents ... recently raised from 60 days ago when the ests avg'd a Loss of 36 cents.
Amid the weak market, and the other conditions pointed out in my post, I fully expected LGND to fall - at least momentarily on the bad news.
Hence the trader's saw, "It's not the news, but the market's reaction to the news". In this case, LGND was moderately strong when the news background would have suggested weakness.
Tony, your value to the thread comes through again. Only someone like you would call me out on this, giving me an opportunity to correct the error, and hopefully clarify the meaning of my post.
On another topic, as a shareholder I really appreciate the way management has controlled costs. With all the deals, and mergers, they could have used the opportunity to spend fast and loose. They did not. It gave me a happy moment this morning, after reading the report. Contrast that with another investment I had - until they reported Q1. Similar situation... mergers. But that management went crazy with my money! I immediately sold the stock, and over the last 2 weeks, it has fallen another 4 points. Apparently other investors were frustrated with the management as well. In this case, hats off to Robinson and the rest for keeping things under good control while keeping many balls in the air. It gives me reason to give management the benefit of the doubt when a merger like SRGN takes place. I remain a loyal investor in LGND. Hope to add to position again, now that it closed back over the 200 dma and the 20 dma.
Thanks again, Tony. Keep nit-picking. I do.
Good luck longs,
Herbert |
