Midatech Pharma Share Discussion Threads

[babbler] 01/5/2020 08:25

Strangely quiet.

[smackeraim] 30/4/2020 16:24

Up 97% on Nasdaq maybe something going on??

[algernon2] 20/4/2020 13:11

Running out of time to jump on anything by the sounds of it. Regretfully.

[escapetohome] 17/4/2020 08:55

Come on poor old midatch

When are YOU going to jump on the covid bandwagon?

[psychochopper] 05/3/2020 00:54

AM, you come across as an identikit to Johnwig! Furthermore, looking at your history of posts, your contention that you are in Asia (8.50am is, let's say, 4.50pm ["late afternoon here"] in Asia) is not supported by the times during the day that you have posted over the years. Otherwise it would infer that you frequently post at 2 or 3 in the morning. I cannot demonstrate that beyond doubt, for you might contend (weakly, given the evidence) that you travel often. For choice, though, the normal person would see you as a liar and a clown.

Just a quick question - how do you know that most "tickers" on the board are only active in the morning? There is a reasonable time-spread of posts every trading day (and beyond) looking over the past two or three years. Perhaps you have coffee mornings together and you know what their thinking is? As I say, it's that darned correlation thing which keeps jabbing its finger into your soft parts.

Anyway, nice of you to turn up to post again after 4 months away. Travelled far? Or is it a case that Johnwig has had to go deep into the bench of aliases to construct a defence to his clear stupidity.

Just going back to the question originally posed - "my hypothesis is that the probability of these 7 people actually being correlated is significant" - you fool, I was not saying whether or not it was high or low (happenstance, your word) but I was asking you to work out what the chances were of this hypothesis being valid! I think you need to go even deeper into your bench as I have seen no progress up to now. In fact, if this were a 9 mark question, you've scored zero so far. But there's still time.

[psychochopper] 04/3/2020 00:50

Perhaps you can use a portion of your "IQ of 152" to explain the following conundrum:

You posted four times on this board today. On the first two occasions, you received a healthy 7 approvals for each of your efforts. All within about 15 minutes of your posts. That would imply many people on this board, though the overall frequency of posts suggests this is unlikely. No matter.

However, on the latter two posts, you received zero approvals. I am struggling to see what was materially different about these two posts which would lead to such a shrug of the shoulders. What is the likelihood of 7 uncorrelated readers of this board all disappearing during the day or changing their view(s) of the quality of your posts? After all, they were all well written (though wrong in every respect!- but equally wrong, and therefore would be likely to transmit the same quality to the 7 original approvers).

To a mere simpleton (as you describe me) like myself who would not boast - as you often do - of this, that or the other, (like IQ, trading prowess [especially after the fact], houses here, there and everywhere da de da de da) my hypothesis is that the probability of these 7 people actually being correlated is significant. Now, this could be established by a bright person who can apply the appropriate statistical tests, so I would be happy to leave that to you.

On the subject of correlation, posts of yours which contain boasts appear correlated with folk pointing out your investment and trading errors regarding just about anything that relates to Woodford (and just about any stock he had ever championed). A defence you feel comfortable with, alongside scaling the high ground of spelling and grammar precision. Not really a substitute for P&L quality, but I'm sure it provides an alternative form of satisfaction. After all, some people substitute the recording of locomotive movements (and parkas) for meaningful work.

Let me know how you get on.

[psychochopper] 03/3/2020 14:22

Oh, I'm Chimers now am I? And I live in Wales?

Johnwig, you are not blessed with a high IQ. You actually have no idea who or what I am, and never really have. It has never been my intention to fool you as you achieve that for your own account!

Just to put your mind at rest, the most recent portfolio I managed (professionally) amounted to a risk of almost precisely €100mm per basis point. Given that it had a duration of 10 years (or so), I will leave it to you to work out the actual nominal size!(see if you can). Myself and my portfolio managers did some amazing things to save a large bank post 2007. So of course I know nothing of investment!

But don't feel too admonished - there are many in the City as unaware as you.

[johnwig] 03/3/2020 14:00

Have you just returned from Giberria, psychowinnie? Because you, the user of scores of monikers, are speaking fluent Gibberish. It's always obvious which pseudonyms are yours.

Your big problems:

a.You are basically incoherent.

b. You cannot spell very well.

c. The lingua franca of this thread is English. Your grasp of its grammar is frequently exiguous.

d. Since you live on the Welsh side of the Afon Dyfrdwy you should try writing in Welsh. I'm told it is the language of heaven, in the unlikely event that you ever go in that direction.

e. You do not seem to know very much about investment. The garbage you write about IDE, BUR, PURP, and many others proves that incontrovertibly. IDE currently is the most laughable of your ramping attempts under that chimers fake name.

[psychochopper] 03/3/2020 13:25

Nope, it's all 7 of you who are pretty dim! You, Johnwig, Harijan (who has lost a fortune on this and especially WPCT - also showing breathtaking naïvety along the way - and 4 other dimwits who could be just about any combination of the remaining number of monikers you use to excuse your haplessness.

It's so funny to watch you squirm. Happened before when 1tcm1 forgot that he was not ChuckoI. These things happen when you are using multiple IDs. Quite excusable, I suppose, if not just a tad sad.

[chuckol] 03/3/2020 09:29

I think you'd have to be pretty dim if you believed that johnwig was being serious.

[psychochopper] 03/3/2020 09:11

"deliberately designed" You sound like Mainwaring - "I was wondering who would spot that first".

Trouble is that you take many for fools, but cannot see the real ones. Don't play poker for God's sake.

[officiallyrob] 03/3/2020 08:47

Johnwig, I think you should call your broker this morning and insist that he sells immediately. You can't miss out on a 1,876% rise. Do it NOW, quick!!!!.....before you realise you have 20x fewer shares to sell and the overall price has actually decresed ;-)

[jpuff] 03/3/2020 08:43

Ah well but with 20 times fewer shares I'm no better off than yesterday lol

[johnwig] 03/3/2020 08:31

OK lads, we are in the money! Have you seen? Midatech is up 1,876% this morning, according to ADVFN. That would make it my 4th best ever rise.

Unfortunately my stockbroker won't let me sell at that price, or any price. LOL

[onceatrader] 27/2/2020 20:54

Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Market Size Is Projected to Grow

[psychochopper] 14/2/2020 15:45

So your second post in 3 months on ADVFN merely says “.”. How considerate of you to suddenly reappear for the benefit of “unblocking221; a bb that no one gives a hoot about, other than to laugh at morons like you, Brummieloser, and others who made such fools of themselves over the entire WPCT fiasco.

Also, lovely for Chuckol to make a reappearance too. I guess you need all the help you can muster.