2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
115 päivää sitten
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·2 t sittenA new data point in the in vivo CAR-T/circRNA track I think this is worth noting. RiboX Therapeutics has now received FDA IND-clearance for RXIM002, which they describe as the first circRNA-based in vivo CAR-T therapy for autoimmune cytopenias. The program combines circRNA with a targeted LNP-delivery platform and is moving forward towards clinical development. What's interesting from a Circio perspective is not that RiboX and Circio necessarily have any connection – we have no documentation of that. What's interesting is the direction of the technology. During the warrant period on June 5, I asked Erik what they could do if the capital raise ended significantly over 300 MNOK. He answered, among other things, that they could consider: - two parallel IND/clinical programs, - purchase/acquisition of complementary vector or delivery technology, - especially within LNP-DNA/cell therapy, - to make Circio more independent. Circio has now raised around 620 MNOK, they have strengthened the board with strong AAV/RNA expertise through Dinah Sah, and they have just received an oral presentation at ESGCT with the title: «circVec: A DNA Vector Platform Harnessing Intracellular Circular RNA Biogenesis for Next-Generation T Cell Therapies» And at the same time, we see other players taking circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T towards the clinic. For me, this makes one thing clearer: Delivery can be at least as important as the expression platform itself. If circVec can actually provide higher and more long-lasting expression, lower dose, less off-target expression and reduced cellular stress, the question is not just how much circVec is worth alone. What's interesting is what the technology could be worth combined with an effective delivery platform. And this is where the new issuance authorization comes in. I still don't interpret this as that "a new issue is coming". But the authorization can give the board the opportunity to act quickly if an attractive delivery-/vector technology, an acquisition target, or a strategic investor suddenly appears. It's also worth remembering that Erik already mentioned exactly this as a possible use of excess capital on June 5 – before we knew where the capital raise would end up. So I think the RiboX announcement is an interesting external data point showing that the market is moving exactly in the direction of the combination: circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T Does Circio have plans to do something similar? We don't know that. But I will definitely pay a little extra attention to what happens leading up to the H2 data, ESGCT, and the R&D webcast. It's starting to become quite an interesting story. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ribox-therapeutics-announces-fda-ind-clearance-for-rxim002-the-first-circular-rna-based-in-vivo-car-therapy-for-autoimmune-cytopenias-302846525.htmlThis is bullshit, based on speculation and technological incompetence. Firstly, CAR-T is nothing new.. That more are now trying in vivo CAR-T is expected, but your major fallacy lies in the RNA technology itself. RiboX uses artificial (synthetic) circRNA which must be produced and circularized in a factory, and it is difficult to scale up and purify (CMC). In addition, RNA degrades, which means the effect wanes and requires repeated doses. Circio's circVec is not pre-made circRNA, but a DNA recipe. Our own cells produce our own circRNA from the inside, which provides a completely different and more long-lasting expression. This is what makes Circio an investment case.. That RiboX gets IND factory-made RNA and an RNA-specific LNP, does not change this The two companies utilize the technology in fundamentally different ways, and face completely different challenges. I naturally hope that Circio's method works, but we don't know that yet.. That's why we are waiting for readouts.
·11 t sittenI tried to find out who sold aggressively on August 5. Since then, I have collected data on the 300 largest shareholders in Circio. My plan was to write a small program that could show the difference in transactions between two days for individual shareholders. Before I managed to write the program, however, I identified one of those who sold/lent: A single person had sold/lent out more than 1.6 million shares. I am unsure if it is legal to reveal who the person is. So I will not do it now.
Isn't it enough to just see tendencies from trading patterns? Why find the person and post the name here? A justification is needed for what the intention is.- ·13 t sitten · MuokattuCIRCIO – shareholder register 29.07 → 07.08 I have compiled the registrations from 29.07 to 07.08, and there are some movements I think are worth following further. This is not proof of buy/sell, but the pattern is interesting. Nordnet Liv – clear ping-pong 8,095m → 7,693m → 7,569m → 7,500m → 8,109m → 8,202m → 7,281m → 7,382m So from 8,095m to 7,382m in total, but with enormous movements both ways along the way. 04.08: +609k 06.08: −921k 07.08: +101k This is difficult to interpret as usual net buy/sell alone. J.P. Morgan SE – perhaps the most interesting 352 962 → 241 483 → 357 760 → 357 760 → 421 097 → 421 097 → 1 072 683 From 29.07 to 07.08 there is an increase of as much as 719 721 shares. On 07.08 there are two separate JPM SE entries: 660 000 412 683 Total 1 072 683 shares. At the same time, J.P. Morgan Securities PLC has moved: 655 968 → 639 432 → 678 500 → 709 484 → 711 862 → 723 964 → 778 917 There is an increase of 122 949 shares from 29.07 to 07.08. BNY Mellon When the visible BNY entries are summed: 29.07: ~3,14m 30.07: ~2,86m 31.07: ~2,68m 03.08: ~2,60m 04.08: ~2,54m 05.08: ~3,59m 06.08: ~3,19m 07.08: ~2,81m Here we are talking about around 1 million shares up and down in a short time. That is precisely why I would not have used BNY alone as a buy indicator. BofA is also interesting 29.07: 1 146 110 30.07: 224 712 There is a reduction of 921 398 shares. On 05.08 BofA reappeared with 358 216 shares, i.e. +133 504 from 30.07, before the entry again disappeared from the top 100. Goldman 480 479 → 459 665 → 366 366 Net −114 113 shares. Nordnet Bank 13,663m → 13,684m → 13,574m → 13,527m → 13,547m → 13,611m → 13,658m → 13,790m From 29.07 to 07.08: +127 274 shares Interestingly enough, Nordnet Bank has thus increased its holdings again after the drop around 30.07–03.08. What I find interesting now We have several large American custody/broker accounts that are moving strongly: BofA ↓ JPM SE ↑ JPM Securities ↑ BNY ↕ Goldman ↓ Nordnet ↑ I would therefore pay special attention to whether we get a sequence going forward like: BofA ↓ → BNY/JPM ↑ → Nordnet ↑ within 1–3 registration days. If this happens multiple times, it becomes much more interesting. Then we can start to see a pattern where shares seem to be moved through different manager/custody accounts, instead of each individual change representing an actual buy or sell in the market. But important: the register alone cannot tell us if it is a buy, sell, loan, or internal depot movements. Right now, JPM SE at 1,073m shares is the entry I would follow most closely. Next registrations could be quite interesting. This is taken from the top 100 list. Private individuals are not included.
·22 t sittenCopy from a reflective individual from Finansavisen's forum!👍🏻 There is probably much more behind that incident than this simplified statement you are making here. But it is true, as you say. You should never trust anyone in a forum. Do your own analyses and assessments. Thoroughly familiarize yourself with the specific industries you want to invest in. When it comes to acquisitions in biotech, it cannot, as Utbyttehingsten says, be compared to acquisitions in oil. These are two completely different worlds. Biotech is extremely risky because at least 95% of all biotech companies fail. Not necessarily because they do a bad job, but because their theory simply doesn't work in practice. This is how one innovates in medicine. 100 different companies can fail 100 different times with 100 different ideas on how to solve disease X. But every now and then, a dandelion suddenly grows through the asphalt and manages to find a method that proves to have a wholly or partially good effect on disease X. Such companies are therefore valued sky-high. Big Pharma is willing to pay whatever it costs to get hold of such technology that would otherwise have taken them 10 years to solve themselves, and tens of billions USD to develop. That Circio can be worth 150-500 kroner per share are not numbers pulled out of one's ass, but absolutely realistic estimates, depending on how far they get and how broadly their platform covers. Danish Genmab is today worth 150 billion NOK, which would correspond to over 500 kroner per share for Circio with today's share capital. Genmab is a world leader in antibodies and licenses out its technology to several Big Pharma players. Circio can similarly become a world leader in circRNA and license out its technology to everyone who develops gene and cell therapy in the future. Their technology can also in principle be used to create concrete medicines. This is absolutely a real scenario if they achieve clinical validation within several different therapeutic areas. It is also a fact that Circio already today has one of the world's largest medical companies as a potential customer; we are just waiting for data that can/will trigger a license agreement. So it's up to you whether you want to invest in something that can go up 2000% or down 100%, and whether you are willing to hold shares for anywhere from 2 to 5 years before a breakthrough comes. A small tip: it is very difficult to find a future winner in biotech, but it is very easy to weed out 70-80% of those that will fail if you read up and acquire basic knowledge about the different biotech fields. That way, it becomes a little easier to find a future winner.
·1 päivä sittenJust out of curiosity, how many shares are people holding?
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
115 päivää sitten
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·2 t sittenA new data point in the in vivo CAR-T/circRNA track I think this is worth noting. RiboX Therapeutics has now received FDA IND-clearance for RXIM002, which they describe as the first circRNA-based in vivo CAR-T therapy for autoimmune cytopenias. The program combines circRNA with a targeted LNP-delivery platform and is moving forward towards clinical development. What's interesting from a Circio perspective is not that RiboX and Circio necessarily have any connection – we have no documentation of that. What's interesting is the direction of the technology. During the warrant period on June 5, I asked Erik what they could do if the capital raise ended significantly over 300 MNOK. He answered, among other things, that they could consider: - two parallel IND/clinical programs, - purchase/acquisition of complementary vector or delivery technology, - especially within LNP-DNA/cell therapy, - to make Circio more independent. Circio has now raised around 620 MNOK, they have strengthened the board with strong AAV/RNA expertise through Dinah Sah, and they have just received an oral presentation at ESGCT with the title: «circVec: A DNA Vector Platform Harnessing Intracellular Circular RNA Biogenesis for Next-Generation T Cell Therapies» And at the same time, we see other players taking circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T towards the clinic. For me, this makes one thing clearer: Delivery can be at least as important as the expression platform itself. If circVec can actually provide higher and more long-lasting expression, lower dose, less off-target expression and reduced cellular stress, the question is not just how much circVec is worth alone. What's interesting is what the technology could be worth combined with an effective delivery platform. And this is where the new issuance authorization comes in. I still don't interpret this as that "a new issue is coming". But the authorization can give the board the opportunity to act quickly if an attractive delivery-/vector technology, an acquisition target, or a strategic investor suddenly appears. It's also worth remembering that Erik already mentioned exactly this as a possible use of excess capital on June 5 – before we knew where the capital raise would end up. So I think the RiboX announcement is an interesting external data point showing that the market is moving exactly in the direction of the combination: circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T Does Circio have plans to do something similar? We don't know that. But I will definitely pay a little extra attention to what happens leading up to the H2 data, ESGCT, and the R&D webcast. It's starting to become quite an interesting story. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ribox-therapeutics-announces-fda-ind-clearance-for-rxim002-the-first-circular-rna-based-in-vivo-car-therapy-for-autoimmune-cytopenias-302846525.htmlThis is bullshit, based on speculation and technological incompetence. Firstly, CAR-T is nothing new.. That more are now trying in vivo CAR-T is expected, but your major fallacy lies in the RNA technology itself. RiboX uses artificial (synthetic) circRNA which must be produced and circularized in a factory, and it is difficult to scale up and purify (CMC). In addition, RNA degrades, which means the effect wanes and requires repeated doses. Circio's circVec is not pre-made circRNA, but a DNA recipe. Our own cells produce our own circRNA from the inside, which provides a completely different and more long-lasting expression. This is what makes Circio an investment case.. That RiboX gets IND factory-made RNA and an RNA-specific LNP, does not change this The two companies utilize the technology in fundamentally different ways, and face completely different challenges. I naturally hope that Circio's method works, but we don't know that yet.. That's why we are waiting for readouts.
- ·11 t sittenI tried to find out who sold aggressively on August 5. Since then, I have collected data on the 300 largest shareholders in Circio. My plan was to write a small program that could show the difference in transactions between two days for individual shareholders. Before I managed to write the program, however, I identified one of those who sold/lent: A single person had sold/lent out more than 1.6 million shares. I am unsure if it is legal to reveal who the person is. So I will not do it now.Isn't it enough to just see tendencies from trading patterns? Why find the person and post the name here? A justification is needed for what the intention is.
- ·13 t sitten · MuokattuCIRCIO – shareholder register 29.07 → 07.08 I have compiled the registrations from 29.07 to 07.08, and there are some movements I think are worth following further. This is not proof of buy/sell, but the pattern is interesting. Nordnet Liv – clear ping-pong 8,095m → 7,693m → 7,569m → 7,500m → 8,109m → 8,202m → 7,281m → 7,382m So from 8,095m to 7,382m in total, but with enormous movements both ways along the way. 04.08: +609k 06.08: −921k 07.08: +101k This is difficult to interpret as usual net buy/sell alone. J.P. Morgan SE – perhaps the most interesting 352 962 → 241 483 → 357 760 → 357 760 → 421 097 → 421 097 → 1 072 683 From 29.07 to 07.08 there is an increase of as much as 719 721 shares. On 07.08 there are two separate JPM SE entries: 660 000 412 683 Total 1 072 683 shares. At the same time, J.P. Morgan Securities PLC has moved: 655 968 → 639 432 → 678 500 → 709 484 → 711 862 → 723 964 → 778 917 There is an increase of 122 949 shares from 29.07 to 07.08. BNY Mellon When the visible BNY entries are summed: 29.07: ~3,14m 30.07: ~2,86m 31.07: ~2,68m 03.08: ~2,60m 04.08: ~2,54m 05.08: ~3,59m 06.08: ~3,19m 07.08: ~2,81m Here we are talking about around 1 million shares up and down in a short time. That is precisely why I would not have used BNY alone as a buy indicator. BofA is also interesting 29.07: 1 146 110 30.07: 224 712 There is a reduction of 921 398 shares. On 05.08 BofA reappeared with 358 216 shares, i.e. +133 504 from 30.07, before the entry again disappeared from the top 100. Goldman 480 479 → 459 665 → 366 366 Net −114 113 shares. Nordnet Bank 13,663m → 13,684m → 13,574m → 13,527m → 13,547m → 13,611m → 13,658m → 13,790m From 29.07 to 07.08: +127 274 shares Interestingly enough, Nordnet Bank has thus increased its holdings again after the drop around 30.07–03.08. What I find interesting now We have several large American custody/broker accounts that are moving strongly: BofA ↓ JPM SE ↑ JPM Securities ↑ BNY ↕ Goldman ↓ Nordnet ↑ I would therefore pay special attention to whether we get a sequence going forward like: BofA ↓ → BNY/JPM ↑ → Nordnet ↑ within 1–3 registration days. If this happens multiple times, it becomes much more interesting. Then we can start to see a pattern where shares seem to be moved through different manager/custody accounts, instead of each individual change representing an actual buy or sell in the market. But important: the register alone cannot tell us if it is a buy, sell, loan, or internal depot movements. Right now, JPM SE at 1,073m shares is the entry I would follow most closely. Next registrations could be quite interesting. This is taken from the top 100 list. Private individuals are not included.
- ·22 t sittenCopy from a reflective individual from Finansavisen's forum!👍🏻 There is probably much more behind that incident than this simplified statement you are making here. But it is true, as you say. You should never trust anyone in a forum. Do your own analyses and assessments. Thoroughly familiarize yourself with the specific industries you want to invest in. When it comes to acquisitions in biotech, it cannot, as Utbyttehingsten says, be compared to acquisitions in oil. These are two completely different worlds. Biotech is extremely risky because at least 95% of all biotech companies fail. Not necessarily because they do a bad job, but because their theory simply doesn't work in practice. This is how one innovates in medicine. 100 different companies can fail 100 different times with 100 different ideas on how to solve disease X. But every now and then, a dandelion suddenly grows through the asphalt and manages to find a method that proves to have a wholly or partially good effect on disease X. Such companies are therefore valued sky-high. Big Pharma is willing to pay whatever it costs to get hold of such technology that would otherwise have taken them 10 years to solve themselves, and tens of billions USD to develop. That Circio can be worth 150-500 kroner per share are not numbers pulled out of one's ass, but absolutely realistic estimates, depending on how far they get and how broadly their platform covers. Danish Genmab is today worth 150 billion NOK, which would correspond to over 500 kroner per share for Circio with today's share capital. Genmab is a world leader in antibodies and licenses out its technology to several Big Pharma players. Circio can similarly become a world leader in circRNA and license out its technology to everyone who develops gene and cell therapy in the future. Their technology can also in principle be used to create concrete medicines. This is absolutely a real scenario if they achieve clinical validation within several different therapeutic areas. It is also a fact that Circio already today has one of the world's largest medical companies as a potential customer; we are just waiting for data that can/will trigger a license agreement. So it's up to you whether you want to invest in something that can go up 2000% or down 100%, and whether you are willing to hold shares for anywhere from 2 to 5 years before a breakthrough comes. A small tip: it is very difficult to find a future winner in biotech, but it is very easy to weed out 70-80% of those that will fail if you read up and acquire basic knowledge about the different biotech fields. That way, it becomes a little easier to find a future winner.
- ·1 päivä sittenJust out of curiosity, how many shares are people holding?
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
Vain PDF
115 päivää sitten
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q2 -tulosraportti 31.8. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 15.4. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 28.8.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 10.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q2 -tulosraportti 29.8.2024 | ||
2023 Q4 -tulosraportti 25.4.2024 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·2 t sittenA new data point in the in vivo CAR-T/circRNA track I think this is worth noting. RiboX Therapeutics has now received FDA IND-clearance for RXIM002, which they describe as the first circRNA-based in vivo CAR-T therapy for autoimmune cytopenias. The program combines circRNA with a targeted LNP-delivery platform and is moving forward towards clinical development. What's interesting from a Circio perspective is not that RiboX and Circio necessarily have any connection – we have no documentation of that. What's interesting is the direction of the technology. During the warrant period on June 5, I asked Erik what they could do if the capital raise ended significantly over 300 MNOK. He answered, among other things, that they could consider: - two parallel IND/clinical programs, - purchase/acquisition of complementary vector or delivery technology, - especially within LNP-DNA/cell therapy, - to make Circio more independent. Circio has now raised around 620 MNOK, they have strengthened the board with strong AAV/RNA expertise through Dinah Sah, and they have just received an oral presentation at ESGCT with the title: «circVec: A DNA Vector Platform Harnessing Intracellular Circular RNA Biogenesis for Next-Generation T Cell Therapies» And at the same time, we see other players taking circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T towards the clinic. For me, this makes one thing clearer: Delivery can be at least as important as the expression platform itself. If circVec can actually provide higher and more long-lasting expression, lower dose, less off-target expression and reduced cellular stress, the question is not just how much circVec is worth alone. What's interesting is what the technology could be worth combined with an effective delivery platform. And this is where the new issuance authorization comes in. I still don't interpret this as that "a new issue is coming". But the authorization can give the board the opportunity to act quickly if an attractive delivery-/vector technology, an acquisition target, or a strategic investor suddenly appears. It's also worth remembering that Erik already mentioned exactly this as a possible use of excess capital on June 5 – before we knew where the capital raise would end up. So I think the RiboX announcement is an interesting external data point showing that the market is moving exactly in the direction of the combination: circRNA + delivery + in vivo CAR-T Does Circio have plans to do something similar? We don't know that. But I will definitely pay a little extra attention to what happens leading up to the H2 data, ESGCT, and the R&D webcast. It's starting to become quite an interesting story. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ribox-therapeutics-announces-fda-ind-clearance-for-rxim002-the-first-circular-rna-based-in-vivo-car-therapy-for-autoimmune-cytopenias-302846525.htmlThis is bullshit, based on speculation and technological incompetence. Firstly, CAR-T is nothing new.. That more are now trying in vivo CAR-T is expected, but your major fallacy lies in the RNA technology itself. RiboX uses artificial (synthetic) circRNA which must be produced and circularized in a factory, and it is difficult to scale up and purify (CMC). In addition, RNA degrades, which means the effect wanes and requires repeated doses. Circio's circVec is not pre-made circRNA, but a DNA recipe. Our own cells produce our own circRNA from the inside, which provides a completely different and more long-lasting expression. This is what makes Circio an investment case.. That RiboX gets IND factory-made RNA and an RNA-specific LNP, does not change this The two companies utilize the technology in fundamentally different ways, and face completely different challenges. I naturally hope that Circio's method works, but we don't know that yet.. That's why we are waiting for readouts.
- ·11 t sittenI tried to find out who sold aggressively on August 5. Since then, I have collected data on the 300 largest shareholders in Circio. My plan was to write a small program that could show the difference in transactions between two days for individual shareholders. Before I managed to write the program, however, I identified one of those who sold/lent: A single person had sold/lent out more than 1.6 million shares. I am unsure if it is legal to reveal who the person is. So I will not do it now.Isn't it enough to just see tendencies from trading patterns? Why find the person and post the name here? A justification is needed for what the intention is.
- ·13 t sitten · MuokattuCIRCIO – shareholder register 29.07 → 07.08 I have compiled the registrations from 29.07 to 07.08, and there are some movements I think are worth following further. This is not proof of buy/sell, but the pattern is interesting. Nordnet Liv – clear ping-pong 8,095m → 7,693m → 7,569m → 7,500m → 8,109m → 8,202m → 7,281m → 7,382m So from 8,095m to 7,382m in total, but with enormous movements both ways along the way. 04.08: +609k 06.08: −921k 07.08: +101k This is difficult to interpret as usual net buy/sell alone. J.P. Morgan SE – perhaps the most interesting 352 962 → 241 483 → 357 760 → 357 760 → 421 097 → 421 097 → 1 072 683 From 29.07 to 07.08 there is an increase of as much as 719 721 shares. On 07.08 there are two separate JPM SE entries: 660 000 412 683 Total 1 072 683 shares. At the same time, J.P. Morgan Securities PLC has moved: 655 968 → 639 432 → 678 500 → 709 484 → 711 862 → 723 964 → 778 917 There is an increase of 122 949 shares from 29.07 to 07.08. BNY Mellon When the visible BNY entries are summed: 29.07: ~3,14m 30.07: ~2,86m 31.07: ~2,68m 03.08: ~2,60m 04.08: ~2,54m 05.08: ~3,59m 06.08: ~3,19m 07.08: ~2,81m Here we are talking about around 1 million shares up and down in a short time. That is precisely why I would not have used BNY alone as a buy indicator. BofA is also interesting 29.07: 1 146 110 30.07: 224 712 There is a reduction of 921 398 shares. On 05.08 BofA reappeared with 358 216 shares, i.e. +133 504 from 30.07, before the entry again disappeared from the top 100. Goldman 480 479 → 459 665 → 366 366 Net −114 113 shares. Nordnet Bank 13,663m → 13,684m → 13,574m → 13,527m → 13,547m → 13,611m → 13,658m → 13,790m From 29.07 to 07.08: +127 274 shares Interestingly enough, Nordnet Bank has thus increased its holdings again after the drop around 30.07–03.08. What I find interesting now We have several large American custody/broker accounts that are moving strongly: BofA ↓ JPM SE ↑ JPM Securities ↑ BNY ↕ Goldman ↓ Nordnet ↑ I would therefore pay special attention to whether we get a sequence going forward like: BofA ↓ → BNY/JPM ↑ → Nordnet ↑ within 1–3 registration days. If this happens multiple times, it becomes much more interesting. Then we can start to see a pattern where shares seem to be moved through different manager/custody accounts, instead of each individual change representing an actual buy or sell in the market. But important: the register alone cannot tell us if it is a buy, sell, loan, or internal depot movements. Right now, JPM SE at 1,073m shares is the entry I would follow most closely. Next registrations could be quite interesting. This is taken from the top 100 list. Private individuals are not included.
- ·22 t sittenCopy from a reflective individual from Finansavisen's forum!👍🏻 There is probably much more behind that incident than this simplified statement you are making here. But it is true, as you say. You should never trust anyone in a forum. Do your own analyses and assessments. Thoroughly familiarize yourself with the specific industries you want to invest in. When it comes to acquisitions in biotech, it cannot, as Utbyttehingsten says, be compared to acquisitions in oil. These are two completely different worlds. Biotech is extremely risky because at least 95% of all biotech companies fail. Not necessarily because they do a bad job, but because their theory simply doesn't work in practice. This is how one innovates in medicine. 100 different companies can fail 100 different times with 100 different ideas on how to solve disease X. But every now and then, a dandelion suddenly grows through the asphalt and manages to find a method that proves to have a wholly or partially good effect on disease X. Such companies are therefore valued sky-high. Big Pharma is willing to pay whatever it costs to get hold of such technology that would otherwise have taken them 10 years to solve themselves, and tens of billions USD to develop. That Circio can be worth 150-500 kroner per share are not numbers pulled out of one's ass, but absolutely realistic estimates, depending on how far they get and how broadly their platform covers. Danish Genmab is today worth 150 billion NOK, which would correspond to over 500 kroner per share for Circio with today's share capital. Genmab is a world leader in antibodies and licenses out its technology to several Big Pharma players. Circio can similarly become a world leader in circRNA and license out its technology to everyone who develops gene and cell therapy in the future. Their technology can also in principle be used to create concrete medicines. This is absolutely a real scenario if they achieve clinical validation within several different therapeutic areas. It is also a fact that Circio already today has one of the world's largest medical companies as a potential customer; we are just waiting for data that can/will trigger a license agreement. So it's up to you whether you want to invest in something that can go up 2000% or down 100%, and whether you are willing to hold shares for anywhere from 2 to 5 years before a breakthrough comes. A small tip: it is very difficult to find a future winner in biotech, but it is very easy to weed out 70-80% of those that will fail if you read up and acquire basic knowledge about the different biotech fields. That way, it becomes a little easier to find a future winner.
- ·1 päivä sittenJust out of curiosity, how many shares are people holding?
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Ei dataa
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt