PEB - Pacific Edge Ltd

[Dentie]

Maybe I can clarify the question at least= Your asking what is the difference between a company executive or CEO selling a block of shares(usually a substantial block ) with that of a normal share trader buying or selling shares.I guess the first thing to take into consideration is why the NZX requires the disclosure in the first place(in terms of interest)
The very nature of having to give notice is that it potentially has an effect on the SP---obviously these executives have privy to information that we as shareholders do not have,so there is a potential for conflict of interest.
I dont think it is relevant to compare these executive disclosers (and transactions)to ordinary share investors buying and selling--its just not the same thing---Its is possible though, in many cases that these executive transactions have a direct affect on ordinary buying and selling.

No, I was simply asking Balance if he sold any PEB shares above $1.20. But seeing you appear to be answering for him/her Skid...

I am quite aware why the NZX has rules governing disclosure by related parties. But I think in this instance, it is drawing a long bow to suggest the related parties selling had an effect on the SP - or that they were ramping the price up by their comments - just so they could sell at an increased profit. In fact, I mentioned in a recent post that, contrary to some popular belief, the amount of shares they sold seems to be totally insignificant - compared to their overall level of holding. I think a lot of the recent comments about these related parties is very mischievous - at best... and probably worth looking into further to be honest. Hence the comment about retaining a QC!

If these related parties had sold a large portion of their holdings (say, > 50 to 60%), then you might be onto something but other than that - they are quite entitled to sell like everyone else. Why should they be excluded? If Balance (or anyone else) sold their shares for anything more than $1.20, then it would appear to me they were doing it to profit largely....which is also their right. (Disc....I sold a few at $1.56 so my profit could buy more at the CR prices).

I'm more interested in looking at who initiates those big spikes (against the buying trend) just before the big announcements. They are the ones the NZX and FMA should be interested in. Before any excitement...no, I don't mean with PEB...I am talking generally across the market.

At the end of the day, maybe it's just envy or greed or whatever....but I don't think this is an issue that warrants sanctimonious comments from some that may not even be holding any PEB shares.

[skid]

Im not personally making any assumptions about why the executives sold-(they may simply have observed that Shareholders were getting silly and getting ahead of them selves---But it does often have an affect on the SP (and Should be taken into consideration)

Generally --big wigs buy more share and increase thier holdings =good news (think about buying more yourself)
Big wigs sell...=caution,,think about selling or reducing
Remember it goes both ways--DD increases his holdings tomorrow=it would be good sign (to put into the equation as to what you do)

DD selling could have easily had an adverse affect on the SP last year without him actually doing anything inherently wrong

As for those initiating the big spikes -yes thats who the NZX should be interested in (in an ideal world)but i wouldnt hold your breath.

Im afraid the system is set up in their favor (along with large campaign donations to get your guy in in the US ,who then appoints you or your mates in an office that gives them the power to make decisions that benefit your corp.-think haliburton--etc-etc-etc----Its just one of the many things we have to put up with until someone has the guts to change(and doesnt mind political suicide-----sorry -bit off track

[skid]

No, I was simply asking Balance if he sold any PEB shares above $1.20. But seeing you appear to be answering for him/her Skid...

I am quite aware why the NZX has rules governing disclosure by related parties. But I think in this instance, it is drawing a long bow to suggest the related parties selling had an effect on the SP - or that they were ramping the price up by their comments - just so they could sell at an increased profit. In fact, I mentioned in a recent post that, contrary to some popular belief, the amount of shares they sold seems to be totally insignificant - compared to their overall level of holding. I think a lot of the recent comments about these related parties is very mischievous - at best... and probably worth looking into further to be honest. Hence the comment about retaining a QC!

If these related parties had sold a large portion of their holdings (say, > 50 to 60%), then you might be onto something but other than that - they are quite entitled to sell like everyone else. Why should they be excluded? If Balance (or anyone else) sold their shares for anything more than $1.20, then it would appear to me they were doing it to profit largely....which is also their right. (Disc....I sold a few at $1.56 so my profit could buy more at the CR prices).

I'm more interested in looking at who initiates those big spikes (against the buying trend) just before the big announcements. They are the ones the NZX and FMA should be interested in. Before any excitement...no, I don't mean with PEB...I am talking generally across the market.

At the end of the day, maybe it's just envy or greed or whatever....but I don't think this is an issue that warrants sanctimonious comments from some that may not even be holding any PEB shares.

Keep in mind there may be alot of investors trying to decide whether to buy(not even holding)..or sell--they deserve both sides of the debate IMO

[Dentie]

Keep in mind there may be alot of investors trying to decide whether to buy(not even holding)..or sell--they deserve both sides of the debate IMO

Thanks for reminding me....what ever happened to the much vaunted (& much hackneyed!!) cautionary phrase ... DYOR ... which posters seem to do - right after they have written their "be careful" and "criticism" types of advice etc??

As the saying goes ...you can't have it both ways.

[skid]

I suppose there could just be a giant DYOR and then there would be no need for any posts for or against.

I couldnt help but notice that the ''jump in boots and all'' was missing from your example (both of course should have a DYOR.)

I was responding to your example of comments by those who may not even be holding--To me it seems perfectly logical that those who feel caution is required may not be holding. (until which time indicators point towards reconsidering that position.)

I realize you are commenting on what you consider the extreme cases,(in terms of caution)but there are more moderate views that still lean in that direction..dont throw the baby out with the bath water.

At some point we will find out if the management are doing the product justice.

[Balance]

For newies as part of your DYOR :

Bold on bullish statements but timid when it comes to staking real numbers for the market to track the bold statements - that's PEB if you monitor the company and this thread.

Market is a point now whereby all the announcements coming out from PEB about registering patents, new products etc are big yawns.

Any exuberance by the bulls in the sp from the announcements may lead to a short term sp spike of a few cents (as happened on 24th Feb announcements) but is now used as selling opportunities by those who are wising up to PEB.

Too many examples now of elastic numbers from PEB : including government grants in revenues, showing cash burn without using short term deposits run-down etc.

[Balance]

Two Really Strategic & Important Market Releases are needed, forget the rest, unless it’s a ‘curve ball’ ………


A Patent in India is of no consequence if there are no immediate plans to establish a market. But, it may be really important if there are developments that we are not aware of; I don’t think that is the case however, because Pacific Edge has advised they are focusing on the America market.


NEED TO SEE. Centres for Medicare & Medicaid Services sign up to CxBladder.



NEED TO SEE. Veterans Administration Hospitals sign up to CxBladder.

Good points re the NEED TO SEE, Hancocks.

Pertinent to CMS :

PEB commenced discussions and negotiations with CMS in June 2013 with the aim of completing a deal by August 2014. It's 6 months after Aug 2014 and conspicuously, PEB has not provided any update or made any mention of CMS in its AGM and the commentary in its half year's results. The slippage in getting a CMS deal means at its best a delay in PEB achieving 'expected' sales, or at its worse, something fundamentally amiss.

[Whipmoney]

Good points re the NEED TO SEE, Hancocks.

Pertinent to CMS :

PEB commenced discussions and negotiations with CMS in June 2013 with the aim of completing a deal by August 2014. It's 6 months after Aug 2014 and conspicuously, PEB has not provided any update or made any mention of CMS in its AGM and the commentary in its half year's results. The slippage in getting a CMS deal means at its best a delay in PEB achieving 'expected' sales, or at its worse, something fundamentally amiss.

It's a grey swan.. it could happen tomorrow for all you know.

[Balance]

It's a grey swan.. it could happen tomorrow for all you know.

Or a black swan?

Based upon the lack of real progress with the other HUGE national networks PEB signed up in 2013, no point holding one's breath even if CMS signs up that it's going to be a boomer for CxBladder sales.

PEB initiated user programs in 2013 to try and convert urologists and is still doing it today!

[MAC]

Pacific Edge advise within their billing policy that;

“Pacific Edge is a Medicare provider. Pacific Edge will accept patients with Medicare coverage, and these patients will have no financial responsibility for Cxbladder”

http://www.cxbladder.com/for-patients/billing-policy/

Unlike yourself, some of us bothered to go to the August AGM in Dunedin, where shareholders were advised by the CEO, at that time, that Pacific Edge were effectively stacking invoices ready to forward for payment upon an agreement to do so, good progress to that point.

Then, during the HY report conference call the CEO advised us that Medicare were accumulating a dossier of validation, that means study and clinical setting user programme outcomes. Many of which were complete at that time with an intention of preparing a multi-centre international study paper.

Since then it has come to our attention that Pacific Edge are now being reimbursed under Medicare Advantage Plans.

The CMS adoption process is not a black and white switch, there are a sequential series of process steps that must be undertaken.

In the big picture Pacific Edge are more or less relatively on track under that process, but oh don’t allow all that to get in the way of your relentless down ramping.