Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

goldminingXpert (29.80)

iBio Grossly Overvalued

Recs

9

February 09, 2011 – Comments (10) | RELATED TICKERS: IBIO , PLX

Here's my take on iBio Inc. Stock is trading down more than 5% this morning. With 3 employees, no revenue, and a $175 million market cap, it has a lot farther to fall.

10 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On February 09, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Momentum21 (96.83) wrote:

c'mon man...you ruined the IBIO mojo. I closed it and got 4.85 points! 

Are you targeting my green thumbs? : ) 

Report this comment
#2) On February 09, 2011 at 2:07 PM, goldminingXpert (29.80) wrote:

Haha, nope, not targetting your green thumbs. For the reasons above, however, I don't IBIO deserved the positive mojo it had going. ;( That's too bad about the 4.85 points though -- I hate it when that happens.

Report this comment
#3) On February 09, 2011 at 8:36 PM, ikkyu2 (99.39) wrote:

3 employees?  Man, if I had 3 employees and my company was worth $175 million, I'd sell the company, give the other 2 guys their $58 million bonus, and walk away with the rest!

Report this comment
#4) On February 10, 2011 at 10:07 AM, goldminingXpert (29.80) wrote:

http://www.thestreetsweeper.org/undersurveillance.html?i=1575

The plot thickens... 

Report this comment
#5) On February 10, 2011 at 3:41 PM, blake303 (29.51) wrote:

I don't own iBio or care which direction it beyond my green CAPS pick being suddenly in the red, the disclaimer at that article indicates a clear conflict of interest. 

 

* Important Disclosure: Prior to the publication of this article, a third-party investor with whom TheStreetSweeper has a profit-sharing arrangement effected a “short sale” of 89,715 shares of the stock of iBio, Inc. at $5.31 a share with the intent of profiting from decreases in the price of such stock. TheStreetSweeper will share in any profits the third-party investor realizes from the short sale. An explanation of the mechanics of a “short sale” is available athttp://www.sec.gov.answers.shortsale.htm.

Report this comment
#6) On February 10, 2011 at 3:44 PM, blake303 (29.51) wrote:

Ughh. Would be nice to have some comment editting features. That should have read:

I don't own iBio or care which direction it trades beyond my green CAPS pick being suddenly in the red, but the disclaimer at the end of that article indicates a clear conflict of interest. 

Report this comment
#7) On February 10, 2011 at 4:44 PM, goldminingXpert (29.80) wrote:

Of course they have a conflict of interest. So does the organized pumping campaign and management's interest to unload it and its families' shares before it collapses.

Report this comment
#8) On February 10, 2011 at 7:32 PM, blake303 (29.51) wrote:

Two wrongs don't make you right. Biased sources that support your argument do not strengthen it. 

Report this comment
#9) On February 10, 2011 at 9:05 PM, goldminingXpert (29.80) wrote:

What are you talking about Blake? 

I wrote my report without any biased sources. I used 10-Ks and the bulls' own research reports. Today's report similarly used the company's filings. Today's reporter is short the stock -- and with good reason -- they found more dirt than I did. The people claiming this report are just as biased as today's reporter and more biased than I (I have no position in the stock) as the people upset today are people who own the stock, have been pumping all over dark corners of the internet, and wish to unload it as soon as registration periods end (very soon). 

Report this comment
#10) On February 10, 2011 at 9:06 PM, goldminingXpert (29.80) wrote:

"I wrote my report without any biased sources" should read any short-biased sources. I used the bulls' own research reports in my argument, as the bullish case for iBio is so flimsy that even their touting of it still paints iBio in a less than flattering light.

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement