"Please can you show me one example of madamswer (or me if you...

"Please can you show me one example of madamswer (or me if you feel inclined) exhibiting such behaviour."


Is this poster still addressing me when she is fully aware that I can't see her posts?
Surely not.

That sure is some bizarre behaviour.

The last post of hers that I can recall reading was something about Celgene's pen hovering above the contract page, about to sign the lucrative partnership agreement with MSB.

Or maybe it was something about the NASDAQ listing being the catalyst for MSB's share price to sky rocket (I recall at the time it being claimed ever so boldly that JP Morgan and Credit Suisse were institutional shareholders were becoming shareholders as part of the NASDAQ listing when, in fact, they were merely the investment banks who were handing the listing ... and for a pretty hefty fee, to boot.)

Or it may have been the well-worn, but incongruous line of "Macquarie wrote a negative report in 2011 and then for years afterwards the small retail investors got sucked into the down draft of the big guys" (although, I've never come close to understanding what that meant).

And then there was some catheter befuddlement that I saw being debunked by others.

As well as the "we don't need to raise capital again because the CEO himself said that we have plenty of partners lining up".

There were so many more gems over time.

Of course, none of the various clangers over the years can compare to the all-time classic of unequivocal proof of Teva being a committed MSB partner was to be found in the Biotech Deal of the Year, 2010.


Whenever it becomes personal on the MSB threads, and the discussion becomes derailed away from discussing the stock and it gets bogged down in speculation about the motives of others, one can't help observing that there is one common participant involved on each occasion.