Proteome Sciences Share Discussion Threads

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 21:21

Hmmm, I’m not so sure, he was ‘here’ from 2002.

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 17:27

#92832 You are wrong Barry. You don't know Freelance, I do. He suffered hugely for believing in Pearce.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 15:12

PramBigear 3 Jul '06 - 20:11 - 38468 of 61525 0 0 0

Give it a rest Goatherd!
"However I find Peter's theories and posts far more likely than yours. You sit on the fence and bleat. He posts what he believes - it is simply up to his readers what they do.
It is possible that you will cost posters vastly more than Peter ever will."

Jeffian's logical posts are certainly as valid as "Peter's theories" and certainly could not COST posters more than Peter's ever will, for Jeffian's implicit message is "don't risk your cash" whilst Peter's is "fill yer boots".

You can only lose money that you already have. Miss an opportunity, perhaps, but that is not a COST.


jeffian3 Jul '06 - 22:59 - 38472 of 61525 0 0 0

Richard,

As Pram points out, a potential profit foregone is not exactly the same as a loss! When Peter said on 27/1/04 "we can be sure that the value of PRM shares will soon far exceed the £8 that Tuco forecast in his recent post" and encouraged people to buy, the share price was around 215. If it fulfilled Peter's best expectations tomorrow by 5-bagging without any opportunity to buy on the way up....then people who took his advice then would just about break even while followers of the Bar Room Monkey tendency would be in the same boat. I call that even-stevens. If, on the other hand, Peter's best expectations are not met, some people out there are nursing a nasty loss. That also presupposes that there will be no opportunity to climb aboard when/if it becomes clear that the potential is being turned into £££ but this flies in the face of the evidence of most major long-term growth stories from Microsoft downwards as a glimpse at their share charts will show. To take your point of a 'potential' £53 valuation over time, other than how stinking rich you want to be, it doesn't matter much whether you climb aboard at 39, 45, 60, £1 or £2, you're still going to do OK.

Obviously my approach is more risk-averse but it concerns me that Peter's posts, however honestly held his views, go beyond just presenting his argument to stating that it is only our own stupidity which prevents us from drawing the same conclusions and specifically encouraging people to buy - and they have. As you say, "it is simply up to his readers what they do" but it doesn't hurt to remind them of the alternatives. Having made a bit of money, I like 'not losing it' almost as much as making more!

In a wider context, as ever PRM-ers are following parallel (but not necessarily convergent!) courses with those of a 'scientific' bent hanging on the perceived progress of the IP while the BRM's want evidence to back up the claims - made by the company itself since 2003 remember - that it can be converted into a highly cash-generative asset. I have seen this so may times with shares like SPS, NTX, TRK, GHT etc. which have all had flurries of excitement having unique technology which should have given them access to vast markets but they've overpromised and underdelivered and the City won't rate them until the £££'s roll in. It's the same with this one and, whilst you may not like me saying it, a glance at the chart shows that if I'm 'wrong' I'm not alone so I may be some use to you contra-cyclical types to show you how the wider market is thinking!

Finally, Richard, in your obsession with traders/shorters, you tend to see everything in terms of 'Buy' or 'Sell' but there is a perfectly respectable position called 'Hold', which is what I've been doing since Feb 2000. Or "sitting on the fence" as you call it.

Regards, Ian

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 15:09

3rd July 2006

It was paraphrasing, but you essentially did in some ridiculous defence of Snodgrass.

[goatherd] 28/3/2024 15:01

Jeffian, I really do not think that was an aphorism of mine! I do not even recognise the sentiments behind it.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 15:00

Whilst I was looking back at a few old posts from around the NNN disgrace, I saw you referenced that back in 2007 too.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 14:44

You may have made a small financial loss jeffian, but you cant say the bb didnt repay you back with more than enough value over that time.

[jeffian] 28/3/2024 14:34

End of an era for me. Just sold 'em as part of the year-end CGT balancing act. 24 years - Feb 2000-Mar 2024 - to achieve absolutely nothing. Ah well, a small but useful offset for CGT.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 12:52

freelance was a liar Dom, him and his band colluded off board to create these stories that they then used each other to verify.

Blatant ramping backed up with bully boy tactics.

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 12:47

That is what I am saying. Pearce's claims, echoed by Freelance and others (and it cost each of those, and me, a large amount of money).

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 12:20

Didn't need managing, enough idiots like me, who believed primarily the Chairman and Chief Scientist.

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 11:57

Managed by a herd instinct

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 11:56

Much missed

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 11:53

Like I said, the thread was managed.

NortyNorfolkNelly - 05 Feb 2007 - 08:29:57 - 54497 of 61526 Proteome Sciences. AGM Statement. - PRM

Right, I saw the shenannigans over the weekend.

I think publishing personal details was taking it too far. I appreciate that some of you are in love with your share, but that was too much.

However, as violence has been threatened in the past on this thread, and as anonymity cannot be assured, I am making this my last post. And no, I won't be reading the follow ups to this post, so don't waste your breath.

Goodbye.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 11:52

The avatar hasnt posted for 17 (seventeen) years, Dom.

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 11:48

Where is NNN these days.

[dominiccummings] 28/3/2024 11:39

#92819 Even the most experienced investors have been 'taken' by this company.

[barry evans] 28/3/2024 10:32

You were all lapping it up at the time, despite avatars trying to warn you what the off board gang we up to.

[coldale1] 28/3/2024 10:03

Dwchag, perhap you should ask Tuco1.
He used to have the *answers to all your questions,

*wrong answers that cost you a fortune.

[glennrcharles] 27/3/2024 15:48

I thought the stroke test had issues. Is it fit for purpose or are there fundamental problems that might also undermine the effectiveness of any alzheimer test? Just asking. Have been away awhile. Glenn