Trappists, Gold and Nanno-Traps
Last week, I introduced two new stocks which Mr Beerver bought up to diversify his portfolio a bit: NNVC and AUY.
But first, just in case there is anyone out there who may doubt the power of beer as a driver of wealth, here’s just one way that beer allows people to reach lofty goals.
Today, I’d like to talk about Mr Beerver’s newest picks a bit.
NNVC, AKA Nanoviricides Inc is developing a novel influenza drug that will target the virus itself for destruction. Basically, the viricides fool the virus into infecting them instead of a normal cell, thereby wasting the viral payload. No more virus. The whole thing gets eliminated through the urinary system and is therefore likely to be very gentle on the host’s organs. The drug has already cleared an initial safety study and will go through another big one soon. They need to do two more pre-IND-enabling studies before moving on with their product but they’ve established maximum dosages for the studies last year.
They are also producing the very first oral nano-medicine. This baby survives stomach acid and gets through the lining and into the blood-stream intact. As an added bonus, the oral version may ALSO serve as an effective vaccine because some of the virus trapped in the cides get caught up by the immune system before being eliminated.
The CEO runs everything on a shoestring budget and gets results more-or-less on time.
The biggest risk here is that the drug has some unexpected effects in humans despite having been found safe in over 5,000 animals thus far. That would be the end of this venture. Definitely something in line with Mr Beerver’s last gamble, ISCO.
AUY, AKA Yamana Gold is a mid-sized gold producer that digs for gold in South America. They have a low production cost and are viable until a gold price of about 950$/oz. Last year, after gold took a huge tumble, they have not reduced their dividend or been forced to write down assets. That could indicate a strong company or it could just be that the CEO is nuts.
It could also be because they may have been high-grading their mines, looking for the best bits of the mine to dig out first at the expense of the rest. I hope that’s not the case but I’ve really no way of knowing and I’ve been told that it was fairly common last year.
Assuming though that they haven’t permanently damaged their mines through high-grading, their conservative accounting practices should let them live through a gold down-turn and allow them to profit enormously in the following up-swing.
The other risk here is that the mines are located in South America and include property in Argentina. Nationalization of assets is a definite risk going forward.
Mr Beerver’s assets now look like this:
(Click for a clearer picture)
Now then, a note about last week.
Mr Beerver sold half of his ISCO at the price of 0.23$. As pretty much ALWAYS happens with me, the stock took THAT day to jump another 11% up. Heh.
So what’s Mr Beerver to do? Feel like a moron? Hardly. He took a profit and that’s ALWAYS good. Getting the very tops and bottoms of a market or a stock is not something Mr Beerver or I can do well at all. Getting the direction right is tricky enough! So, if you’re investing and thinking that you can time the exact bottom or top of anything, let me know how… I want to know exactly how it’s done!
Investment newsletters often like to capitalize on that idea. They’ll tell you that with their unparalleled service, you can get in at the bottom and get out at the top every time and just in time! Most of the good ones will even boast of prior returns.
Those boasts may even be “true” but the chances of that are slim. Even if true, the chances that they can brew another batch of successful picks are not good.
My main problem with investment newsletters is that they cherry pick their success. If they first recommended a stock at 10$ and it then went down to 5$ where they AGAIN recommended a buy before the price went back up to 15$ before resting more firmly at 13$, they’ll claim a 300% gain on investment. BS! If they bought the same dollar amount both times, they only got a 100% gain, though that’s still pretty nice!. Still, it ignores the fact that it’s only trough to peak and that in effect, NO ONE could have realistically gotten that return.