Thanks Victor and Robert.
Since I don't own TCLN I'm indifferent to the financial status of the shareholders, except that I'd like them to become wildly wealthy due to the total success of Oncolym, TNT and the other stuff in wiping out NHL. So I'm not really interested in carrying on reverse split reviews, when any argument which can be made has been made. I'm more interested in the financial stability of TLCN and clinical outcomes with Oncolym, TNT, and the whole freezer full of secret products they might one day bring into daylight.
I think the wild wealth is unlikely, but there are good prospects for the products, so I'm watching and waiting - sort of like they used to do with low grade NHL before the advent of Rituxan. An investment opportunity might arise again with TCLN which will tempt me.
I do agree with this part of what you say Victor:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
quote.yahoo.com
one possible explanation (but not the only one, in previous exchange we have agreed that reverse splits are just an attempt to attack the symptoms rather than the causes. Ergo: without real fundamental changes a reverse split will not by itself alter the course of history.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Reverse splits sure won't change the fundamentals of the company and the long term graph shows what shareholders think of those fundamentals for Cytel. Since the Nov reverse split, the trend, as one would expect, has continued. On very low volume one should note.
Also, the closing price was $3, so in your example, the shareholder would have $500 less value at the close today. But at one stage they were ahead.
The warning signs for companies given by Robert are good, but should not displace thinking for oneself. A reverse split is certainly a warning that things haven't been going as well as expected. One would want to be sure those failing factors are finished.
Maurice |
