The Life Sciences Report features leading investment coverage of the life sciences sector, including biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, tools & diagnostics, and medical devices. A Streetwise Reports publication. www.TheLifeSciencesReport.com
I am a psychologist at the University of Massachusetts/Amherst. I am on our campus’s Institutional Review Board, which must conclude that proposed studies involving human subjects are conducted ethically and are designed well enough so that any risks involved are justified by the likely benefits obtained.
I teach about analytical reasoning, leadership skills, reconciling apparently incompatible positions, designing, implementing, and evaluating policies, and how to critically evaluate competing health claims based on the samples studied and methods of data collection and analysis used.
Most of my investments involve owning medical industry stocks.
BioGroup Team (BGT) is a self-organized panel of professionals with a shared interest in trading and investing in the healthcare and life sciences sectors. Our experts’ editorial team is comprised of individuals with extensive background in research, science, economics and trading in the biotechnology / health sectors.
Our main focus is identifying and analyzing cutting edge biotechnology companies that are under or over-valued. We obtain information from public sources that we believe to be accurate and reliable, and not from company insiders or persons who have a relationship with company insiders. Our aim is to deliver a succinct analysis which is clear and detailed enough to provide the reader with a better understanding of our findings and conclusions.
I am the Chief of Operations at Wolfram Solutions, the consulting arm of the large privately held software company, Wolfram Research. I manage teams of programmers developing custom applications for business and, government, applying advanced analytic methods to practical challenges. I played a major role in the development of many of the financial features of Mathematica and Wolfram|Alpha. I have been at Wolfram for over 15 years. My academic background is in the social sciences and analytic methods in the social sciences, including finance, economics, statistics, modeling, simulation, and operations research. I studied at the University of Chicago, both undergrad and grad. I am also an individual investor with 30 years experience, mostly using mutual funds and fundamental analysis, plus specific investments in the financial sector. My contributions on Seeking Alpha focus on the financial sector and monetary economics, and what analysis of those areas can tell us about other macro trends. I also discuss portfolio theory, formal methods in finance, modeling and simulation of financial prices and economic time series, government statistical releases, financial regulation, and monetary policy.
I'm an independent equity researcher, writer and investor based in Amsterdam. My primary focus is on the micro-cap segment of the market. I also work for pension funds as a member of the Board and Investment Committee. Lastly, I enjoy soccer, sports in general and brewing the best coffee one can make at home.
I hold multiple undergraduate degrees with concentrated focus in the fields of Psychology, Sociology, History, and Economics. Prior to working as an independent strategist for a handful of clients, I was employed as a behavioral economist for a private London based group. Before that, I worked for domestic entities such as FBR and ACC Capital.
In terms of equities analysis, my focus is strictly on long term investments, emerging biotechnology entities, distressed or undervalued companies, and maritime commerce. In terms of market analysis, my focus is on the market implications of social and non-traditional factors. I do not discredit more traditional technical and fundamental analysis, but I value greatly the largely underrated, and often forgotten, historical evolution of capitalism and capital market psychology. Thus, some articles I write will be highly speculative and unorthodox, and will likely represent a minority opinion. Others, when undervaluation is a motivating factor for the article having been written, will be highly technical and metric based.
Also, I urge readers to consider the premise of investment horizon, and authorship intention, when reading my contributions. Many of the articles for companies which I endorse will be deemed "long term", which I generally consider to be no less than 2-3 years unless otherwise noted. Moreover, some articles are written simply to test a potential investment thesis in an effort to garner feedback about prospective positions. In the latter, the "Risk" segment of articles will be thoroughly detailed and should be heavily weighed. Many such pieces will be long "ideas", not necessarily long "recommendations" or "endorsements", and it is imperative that readers understand that prior to any assumptions being made or conclusions being drawn. Thus, I would implore readers to consider my articles carefully and thoroughly, and to ask any questions they may have pertaining to publication purpose if not otherwise clearly defined. I will always do my best to respond in a timely fashion.
Lastly, I am a fervent proponent of the value brought to investments by behavioral finance theory, and I utilize this premise in all equities analysis.
Anonymity Disclosure: I am fully cognizant of the fact that some readers question the integrity and/or accountability of anonymous contributors. Please know that my preference for privacy is a two fold consideration; (1) I remain under a revolving open contract to consult for an entity where I signed a lifetime NCND agreement. In order not to risk violating any potential terms of that agreement, now or in the future, I maintain a very low web based profile. (2) I am a proponent of unbiased analysis being openly shared among prospective investors. However, in order to ensure no collisions occur between professional patronage and personal privacy, I have elected to utilize anonymity as the barrier between the two.
James A. Kostohryz has accumulated over twenty years of experience investing and trading virtually every asset class across the globe.
Kostohryz started his investment career as an analyst at one of the US's largest asset management firms covering sectors as diverse as emerging markets, banking, energy, construction, real estate, metals and mining. Later, Kostohryz became Chief Global Strategist and Head of International Investments for a major investment bank. Kostohryz currently manages his own investment firm, specializing in proprietary trading and institutional portfolio management advisory.
Born in Mexico, Kostohryz grew up between south Texas and Colombia, has lived and worked in nine different countries, and has traveled extensively in more than 50 others. Kostohryz actively pursues various intellectual interests and is currently writing a book about the impact of culture on economic development. He is a former NCAA and world-class decathlete and has stayed active in a variety of sports.
Kostohryz graduated with honors from both Stanford University and Harvard Law School.
You can receive custom delivery of all of Mr. Kostohryz's published work on Seeking Alpha, The Street, and other media, as well as exclusive material, by following the link below. It is absolutely free:
You may connect with Mr. Kostohryz via the following social networks:
When connecting, be sure to identify yourself as a Seeking Alpha reader.
Lawrence is the Managing Director of Fuller Asset Management. He has 20+ years of experience managing investment portfolios and serving the needs of individual clients. He began his career as a Financial Consultant in 1993 with Merrill Lynch. He worked for First Union Brokerage, Morgan Stanley and ING in the same capacity before realizing his long-term goal of complete independence. He graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a B.A. in Political Science in 1992.
Biotech stock trading and investing for 25 years. PhD in biology, MS in computer science.
Extensive experiences in biotech/pharmaceutical companies, in both USA and China, serving middle to senior executive positions. After 12 years of research at top institutions/universities and 10 years of management in biotech/pharmaceutical industry, I am now a full time biotech investor/trader, residing at Las Vegas.
I mainly rely on fundamental analysis to pick biotech stocks, either long or short. I also use proprietary programs to aid my screening process. Currently, I am working with a group of advanced option traders in a quest to tame volatile biotech stocks.
PropThink is an intelligence service that delivers long and short trading ideas to investors in the healthcare and life sciences sectors. Our Editorial Team is comprised of individuals with a strong background in science, medicine and the business of successfully commercializing therapeutics, medical devices, diagnostics and healthcare services. Our ultimate objective is to leverage the knowledge, experience, and relationships of our contributors to introduce our subscribers to profitable long and short investment opportunities in the healthcare sector.
Successfully trading, and investing in emerging growth healthcare companies is a difficult task. Over 90% of drugs never make it out of the clinic. Huge capital requirements along the way result in highly dilutive equity financings often done on the backs of retail investors. At PropThink, we believe that due diligence is the key to success in this industry. We leverage a combined 50 years of experience in science, medicine, legal, regulatory affairs, finance, and operational industry experience to analyze companies at a highly technical level. This detailed analysis and due diligence process defines our editorial strategy and provides our subscribers a high level of confidence in our research. Our focus is on identifying and analyzing technically-complicated companies and equities that are grossly over or under-valued.
Visit PropThink.com to see all of our coverage and research, and subscribe to our free newsletter to receive reports, articles, and trading alerts.
Mike Havrilla is a former pharmacist (retail and home infusion settings), biotech stock trader, and writer with experience that includes full-time online trading since 2009, working as a full-time pharmacist from 2004-2009, and writing for investors since 2007. Mike holds Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) and Bachelor of Science (Biology) degrees from the University of Pittsburgh and worked in the pharmaceutical industry for Wyeth prior to pharmacy school. He is also an avid runner and has completed over 20 marathons with a personal best time under three hours for the 26.2 mile race and under 80 minutes for the half marathon. Mike merged his former publishing business with BioRunUp.com / Mark Messier in October 2010, creating a new online biotech stock research and trading subscription service.
I am an independent equity research analyst and consultant. I focus on finding small-cap biotech stocks where I believe there is favorable risk / reward because of misinformation, lack of information, or a potential fundamental turnaround. I provide detail analysis for investors and investor relations companies. I also provide due diligence and advisory services to companies. Some names I write on I invest in personally and will disclose my position. Names that have hired me to provide due diligence or advisory services I will disclose a business relationship. I previously worked for Zacks Investment Research from 2003 to 2015 as a Senior Biotechnology Analyst. Prior to Zacks, I spent 1999 to 2002 managing money with Eastover Capital in Charlotte, NC where I focused on large-cap equities, specializing in healthcare, energy, and technology. Prior to joining Eastover, I worked as a research scientist for TechLab, Inc., a biotechnology company focused on developing diagnostic kits and vaccines for infectious diseases, between 1995 and 1998. I also spent a year working at the Fralin Biotechnology Center, and a year working for a cancer researcher while at Virginia Tech. I have a B.S. in Biochemistry from Virginia Tech, with a B.A in Chemistry and a minor in Math. I have a M.B.A. in Finance, with a concentration in Securities Analysis, from Wake Forest University. I hold the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) designation.
Grant Zeng has over 10 years of professional experience in equity research and analysis. Grant joined Zacks Investment Research Inc. in March 2006, and currently is a senior equity analyst covering biotech/pharma industry. Before joining Zacks, Grant worked for TheStreet.com as a biotech analyst from 2005-2006. From Sept 2001 to December 2003, Grant worked for China Pacific Insurance Co. as an senior equity/fund analyst. Grant was a healthcare equity analyst with Young & Partners, LLC from Aug 2000 to September 2001. Grant had also teaching and researching experience in pharmaceutical science.
Grant Zeng obtained his MBA with a major in Finance in 2000 from McMaster University, Canada. He also holds a Master of Science in Biochemistry from the University of Western Ontario, Canada; Master of Pharmacology and Bachelor of Medicine from Second Military Medical University, China.
Grant Zeng is a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) charter holder.
I am an electronics exporter and private investor in various IT enterprises in India. I have a Bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and have been trading the markets for the last 2 decades.
Follow @SmithOnStocks on Twitter for more updates (http://twitter.com/#SmithOnStocks
Please read this section carefully for some important disclosures.
Who Am I?
My name is Larry Smith. My career was spent on Wall Street as a biotechnology and pharmaceuticals analyst and also as Director of Research at Smith Barney and Hambrecht and Quist. On my website, SmithOnStocks, which can be addressed from this Seeking Alpha site, I publish articles on biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. I attempt to be objective and present a balanced view of negatives and positives. Readers should not rely on Seeking Alpha for my latest views and articles on Seeking Alpha should be viewed as informational only. The reports section of my website reflects my most current view on a stock.
How Do I Get Paid?
My only source of revenues from my articles is from subscription revenues from my website. I do not receive any compensation from companies or investor relations firms to write articles. I do not receive any direct or indirect compensation from hedge funds, other investment managers or any entity to write articles. I consider direct compensation to be cash compensation that is directly or indirectly tied to my writing articles.
I also do not receive compensation in the form of content. I believe that it is not uncommon for some writers to receive content from hedge funds, other investment managers or any entity that are critical components of the articles that they write. I consider this as non-cash compensation. I do not receive advertising revenues from my website so there is no incentive to be sensational in order to create page hits. I only get paid if my subscribers believe that my articles are of value to them and they then decide to subscribe to my services.
You Should View Articles Published on Seeking Alpha as Informational Only
I want to make clear to readers that not all of the reports that I publish on my website are also published on Seeking Alpha. Also, I will sometimes make reports available on my website a significant period of time before publishing the same or a condensed version on Seeking Alpha. All of the articles that are published on Seeking Alpha and my website at the same time have consistent views and opinions. However, at a later data, it may be the case that my viewpoint and opinion may change and these changes in viewpoint and opinion may only be published in articles on my website.
For this reason, readers may want to check the reports section on my website for my current opinion on a stock and should not rely on the latest Seeking Alpha article as my viewpoint or opinion may have changed. The content on my website is intended only for subscribers, but non-subscribers can view the headlines in the reports section which in most cases but not all will announce a change in viewpoint or opinion. However, I emphasize that I undertake no obligation to update my articles on Seeking Alpha and the latest article on Seeking Alpha may not reflect my latest thinking. This is why I want to re-emphasize that any article published on Seeking Alpha should be viewed as information only.
What SmithOn Stocks is All About
SmithOnStocks is not registered as a securities broker-dealer or as an investment adviser with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or with any state securities regulatory authority. SOS relies solely on publicly disclosed and available information. While SOS makes all reasonable efforts to confirm the accuracy of its statements and opinions, all comments should be considered only as opinion and should not be considered to be absolute fact. Investors should carefully read the Terms & Conditions and Disclosures sections of my website. Investors should carefully perform their own due diligence, seek other points of view and consult with their broker or financial advisor.
Investing in equities includes considerable risk, and investors should be prepared for the possibility of capital loss. This is particularly the case with biotechnology stocks in which hard to predict clinical and commercial outcomes can often disappoint investors and lead to unusually large declines in price. Potential investors in biotechnology stocks must often be prepared to risk the loss of substantially all of their investment. These stocks are only suitable for investors willing and able to accept unusually high financial risk. Users of my information acknowledge that SOS and its owner are not liable to any person or entity for the accuracy, thoroughness, reliability, or timeliness of the information provided. Users further acknowledge that SOS is also not responsible for any direct or indirect losses that may arise from the use of information provided to any person or entity.
Employees of SmithOnStocks or SOS do buy and sell healthcare stocks, some of which may be the subject of written articles appearing on Seeking Alpha. In the event that employees have a stock investment in a company, that ownership is fully disclosed in notes on Seeking Alpha. On any new recommendation, I have a 48 hour waiting period before initiating a position in a stock. I trade in line with my recommendations.
In 1999 I made an ethical breach that resulted in a suspension from being a registered representative in the securities industry for a period of time. I believe that this measure was harsh beyond any reasonable measure and totally unwarranted. I have gone to great lengths in this report to give my side of the story and I hope that you will read the in-depth account that I have provided. This took place over 16 years ago and has long since ended. There has been no restriction from the NYSE for many years on my working as a registered representative if I choose to go through the required registration procedures.
Still, this NYSE action is like a Scarlett letter that I carry. I would urge you to read the full account of the events that led to this NYSE action and if you do so I believe you will agree that this in no way reflects on my integrity and the way I have always conducted myself, then and now. I strongly believe that the action taken was excessive and I think that if you read my full account you will agree.
People make mistakes. Bill Clinton lied under oath, was impeached and disbarred as a lawyer in Arkansas in connection with the Monica Lewinsky affair. However, society has judged him on the body of work that he has done. Suspensions in the security industry can result from serious infractions in which investors are defrauded or swindled. In the events that led to my suspension no investors lost money and as I explain in this report investors who followed my advice made significant amounts of money. Before you rush to any conclusions, let me tell you my story.
I Am Proud in How I Have Conducted My Career
Before I go into the details of this ethical breach, I want to emphasize that I have had a distinguished career on Wall Street. My record from 1971 when I started on Wall Street until 1999 was unblemished. I came to New York from Indiana with no business connections and no money but through hard work I became a highly regarded Wall Street analyst and was selected to the Institutional Investor All Star team in pharmaceuticals for ten years in a row. Based on my record as being the top or one of the top analysts at Smith Barney, I was selected to be head of research from 1981 until 1989. I also served on the Board of Directors at Smith Barney.
Based on my strong reputation, Hambrecht and Quist approached me in 1989 to head their life sciences research effort and to run the annual H&Q (now JP Morgan) healthcare conference. I was a Managing Director and on the operating committee at H&Q. I left H&Q in the late 1990s because I disliked the bureaucracy that was such an integral part of being head of research. I had made enough money to be financially secure and I wanted to get back into doing what I loved, biotechnology research. I joined Tucker Anthony in 1997 as a biotechnology analyst.
Explaining the Events That Led to the NYSE Issue
Tucker Anthony had a sister firm called Sutro and a decision was made early in 1998 to move health care research from Tucker to Sutro. Tucker was an east coast based firm and Sutro was based in Los Angeles. Sutro leased a New York office to which I moved. It was here that an unfortunate train of events was set in motion that led to the NYSE action that put a stain on what I consider an outstanding career.
When I moved from Tucker to Sutro, I maintained my brokerage accounts at Tucker. I conducted normal trading in this account for some months. Then the research administrative research manager for Sutro contacted me and said that for regulatory purposes I would have to move my account from Tucker to Sutro. After some time spent in looking for a broker to handle my account at Sutro I became frustrated. At that time, I had over $5 million in my brokerage accounts. While I was sophisticated in health care investing which made up 10% of my portfolio, I needed help with other parts of the portfolio. I could find no retail broker at Sutro that I wanted to trust my portfolio to. I asked and received approval to look for a broker outside of Sutro and contacted Schwab about finding an investment advisor there to manage my account.
While this was in process, the research administrative manager at Sutro called again and said that Sutro was probably planning to shut down the New York office and I would have to move to Los Angeles or leave the firm. Moving to Los Angeles was not an option for me as my roots were deep in New York. I informed her that given this choice I would soon be leaving Sutro rather then moving to Los Angeles and began to think about what to do. I came to the preliminary conclusion that I would start a consulting firm dealing in biotechnology. I also concluded that I would have to carefully manage my investment portfolio.
It was here that I made a major mistake that I have regretted ever since. Frustrated that my money was tied up in Tucker and I was unable to trade in my account and unable to find a broker that I trusted, I decided to open an account at Schwab without a broker managing it. I indicated on the account transfer form that I was self-employed based on the assumption that I was going to be leaving Sutro imminently. This was my Bill Clinton moment and turned out to be a major mistake.
I continued to work at Sutro while I was waiting for the New York office to be closed which I thought would be in a matter of days or weeks and during this time, I began to execute trades in my account at Schwab. However, after some weeks the research administrative manager at Sutro called and informed me that based on the response they had gotten from clients and the work that I was doing that the firm had reversed itself and now wanted to keep the office in New York and they were also willing to hire two assistants to aid me. There was also the promise of a significant bonus in the upcoming review that based on my work could amount to several hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Not surprisingly, I decided to stay on at Sutro instead of leaving and starting my own firm. I then looked for and finally found a Sutro broker that I could trust to help manage my portfolio. The brokerage accounts at Schwab were opened in February of 1999 and transferred to Sutro in April 1999. When I moved my accounts to Sutro the compliance department at Sutro saw that there was this hiatus when I had an unauthorized account at another firm. This was reported to NYSE.
NYSE Reviewed My Case and Took No Action for Three Years
Management at Sutro looked very closely at what had occurred and decided that while it was certainly not something they could condone, it was a minor infraction and they thought that given my stellar and unblemished record that NYSE would not take any meaningful action other than a wrist slap. Sutro decided to be pre-emptive in administering the wrist slap and fined me and suspended me for one month. They thought that this would satisfy NYSE based on their interpretation of what had occurred. They wanted me to continue with the firm, paid the sizable bonus I was due and committed to picki up all legal fees.
I then had a deposition with a lawyer from NYSE in early 2000. During a one day interview, he went over all of the details of the accounts that were held at Schwab and all of the trades that occurred in detail. He also looked at all of the reports that I had issued as an analyst during this time to compare to the trading in my account to the issuance of research reports. I then heard nothing more from the NYSE for three years.
Sutro concluded as did I that this issue was behind us. Three years later in mid-2003, I heard from NYSE to my shock that they were re-opening the case. Why after three years was the case being re-opened? In talking to the lawyers at NYSE, I came to understand that this was the result of Elliott Spitzer’s attack on Wall Street research. Remember the famous case of Henry Blodgett who recommended stocks of investment banking clients to clients that he thought were actually sales.
NYSE enforcement was under pressure because this unethical practice had been brought to light by Spitzer and they had missed it. They were under pressure to show how tough they could be as enforcers. They reviewed their records and came up with my case which they decided to reopen it in order to show that they were aggressive enforcers.
They went over the same information that had been gathered in early 2000, but came up with an entirely different interpretation. They said that I effected stock transactions shortly before issuance of research reports which I had prepared and this was a violation of Exchange Rule 472.40(2) (iii). They also said that I failed to disclose that I held securities in stocks recommended in a research report. They said that I opened accounts at a member firm that concealed fact of my employment at another member firm; violated Exchange Rule 407(b). They recommended a censure and two and one-half year suspension.
Two Stock Trades at Question
The information on opening an account at another firm is something that I just discussed at length. This was not in dispute. However, NYSE focused on two stock trades that I made and explained the suspension largely on the basis of these two trades. I believe that they were clearly wrong in their conclusions. Let me discuss those trades in detail.
The first trade was in Stericycle, a medical waste disposal company. I had been following the company for some time with a neutral rating. In my reports, I noted that the Company wanted to buy the medical waste disposal business of Waste Management and if they were successful, I would immediately go to a strong buy.
This acquisition was announced on April 14, 2009 after the close at 4 PM EST. Because it was 1 PM in Los Angeles I held a conference call with Sutro’s traders and the salesforce and told them I was going to a strong buy on the stock. It was the practice of Sutro to initiate new ideas with a conference call in this manner. The traders and sales force would then go out to the clients with the idea. After this, the analyst would follow-up by publishing a note on First Call (an electronic distribution network) and this was done on April 15 This was then followed up by a written research report on April 16. On April 16, I bought 2500 shares of the stock at a price of $12. This was accepted practice at Sutro for research analysts buying stocks that they recommended. There was no requirement to wait for a period of time to buy the stock. The analyst was allowed to buy the stock at the same time as other Sutro employees and clients
The NYSE judged my conduct on standards that were different from those that were accepted practices at Sutro. By today’s standards, the Sutro practices seem very loose but they were common at the time. This is why Sutro did not view this trade as a breach of conduct and kept me as an analyst. The NYSE also said that I did not disclose that I owned Stericycle in my written report. However, none of the analysts at Sutro were required at the time to do so. This was also standard operating procedure.
Stericycle was a major success for investors. Adjusting for stock splits the stock traded at about $3.00 when I first recommended it. Fifteen years later, the stock is trading at about $119. This was one of my best recommendations ever. I held the Stericycle stock for many years and only sold it recently.
The NYSE did not accept that my actions were in line with the practices of Sutro even though I produced a letter to that effect from the research administrative officer. I also argued that a $30,000 investment in a portfolio that amounted to $5 million at the time was de minimus. I argued that the stock was bought and maintained as a long term investment. I argued that it was an excellent money making idea for investors. The NYSE dismissed all of these arguments and maintained that I traded ahead of my recommendation.
The second trade that the NYSE emphasized was a trade in Schering Plough. On April 18, the stock had traded down by 5%. I had an accumulate rating on the stock essentially telling investors to buy the stock for the long term, but connoting less emphasis than a buy. In the morning call to traders and salesmen, I alerted them to the price weakness, but told them there was no change in the fundamental outlook and there was no change in my price target. I was not intending to issue a report, but the research administrative manager told me that the price drop in Schering Plough based on my price target indicated 25% upside that was the accepted criteria for a buy recommendation. Hence, I needed to put out a report in which I upgraded my opinion from accumulate to buy.
I bought the stock on April 20 at the same time as the written report was issued. I previously owned 500 shares and this increased my position to 1000 shares for a total investment of about $35,000 which again was within a $5 million portfolio. The NYSE again accused me of the same things as in the Stericycle situation. They said that I traded ahead of my recommendation and did not disclose that I owned the stock. My responses were the same as for Stericycle and were once again rejected.
Was The NYSE Action Justified?
I think that the NYSE action was out of all proportion to what actually transpired. I think the enforcement officers applied new standards in overturning the prior decision to take no action on this case that had been in effect for three years. They were under pressure to make a big splash in the Elliot Spitzer era to show how tough they were. My recommendations were solid recommendations and indeed the Stericycle recommendation was outstanding.
I fully recognize that my decision to open the brokerage account at Schwab prior to resigning from Sutro was an ethical breach on my part even if I was planning to resign from Sutro. When I decided to stay with Sutro, I transferred my accounts immediately. I strongly and absolutely maintain that my trading in Schering-Plough and Stericycle was in accordance with policies in place at Sutro at the time. By today’s standards these seem loose, but this was common industry practice at the time.
The NYSE review was conducted by a mediator and it was he that determined the punishment. He had spent his entire career as an enforcement officer for the NYSE. He was also friends with the NYSE lawyers on my case and sent out to lunch with them during the hearing. He was the judge, jury and executioner of my fate. As I look back, I question his objectivity and motives. In writing his opinion, he did not acknowledge documents from Sutro that showed that my stock trading disclosures were in-line with their internal procedures. I had no opportunity to review or correct his opinion in the opinion he wrote. In a country in which, guilt or innocence is established by one’s peers, mine was determined by a hanging judge with no experience in the securities business and an apparent pre-determined view on my actions.
The enormous advancement in the biological sciences that is taking place has begun to change the traditional way of practicing medicine. Far-reaching biological products are being approved and news about breakthroughs are occupying the media headlines. However, selecting the biotechnology firms for investment requires not only an understanding of the company's finances, but also deep knowledge of the company's potential and the potential and scientific validity of it's products and technologies.
Our Mission is evaluating biotechnology companies, their products, their technologies, scientists, managements, as well as their finances. Our goal is to impart our readers with the knowledge and insight so that they may have a heightened understanding and appreciation for the biotechnology industry.
The Prohost Letter has been in circulation since 1992. Our readers are comprised of venture capital, fund managers, investors, medical professionals and individuals with one common interest, biotechnology.
Prohost Letter is posted in the members areas on the www.prohostbiotech.com. around 40 times a year. Articles are posted several times a week for subscribers in TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS section and in News & Comments sector for all website visitors
It is very hard or impossible to time the broad market consistently — there are no famous investors that got rich by consistently knowing what the broad market would do next. This only makes sense, as there are just too many variables in the broad market. But there are many famous investors who got rich analyzing individual securities, and this is where you should put your focus. You can get an edge in individual securities. Joe Springer was the number 1 ranked stock analyst in the world by tipranks.com, and on most days is still ranked in the top 5%. Joe is a Certified Technical Trainer, and enjoys teaching about the stock market as well as managing portfolios. If you would like to follow Joe on Twitter, his handle is @JoeSpringer.