Is it Time to Take a Little CEL-SCI (CVM) Off the Table?
It’s hard to believe that CEL-SCI (CVM), which was only trading at $0.27 when we suggested it in January, has rallied more than 600%, and is currently priced around $1.85. THAT is the reason we focus on small and micro cap stocks… big winners are uncommon, but when you do latch onto one, wow!
That being said, I have two business items to take care of before we go any further.
- Just for the sake of smart trading, I think it’s time to at least take partial profits on CEL-SCI, even if temporarily.
- Just for the sake of disclosure, I want to make sure there’s no misunderstanding that this site has an indirect compensatory relationship with CEL-SCI.
First things first.
Not only have CVM shares rocketed past resistance around $0.80 recently, today’s peak of $2.10 also matches multi-year highs for the stock… not that it wasn’t deserved. The company’s swine flu technology (LEAPS) may indeed be a game-changer not just for the fight against H1N1, but also a game-changer for the company’s stature in the biotech community. (The U.S. government is interested, for cryin’ out loud.)
Still, a triple-digit rally is a tough thing to hold onto no matter what the cause. So, between the potential brush with long-term resistance and just the sheer size of the recent pop, it may be a smart move to take some profits on CEL-SCI here. (continued below)
Just to be clear, I’m a long-term bull on CEL-SCI. I would be even if we hadn’t picked it in January. I’m also interested in preserving gains though, and my defensive senses are just telling me to shrug of the swine flu euphoria and be smart.
If it’s the wrong move, you can always buy it back later. In fact, the company’s Multikine cancer treatment alone (I think) makes the per-share price worth more than $2.00. That’s a long-term proposition though.
That being said - and not that it matters at this point - you should know that in January, this site received shares from CEL-SCI to present the opportunity to our readers. Since then the entire format for this site has changed; we’re now ad-supported and sponsor-supported, and those shares were transferred to a sister site. So, we still have a vested indirect interest in CVM shares… albeit very indirect
So what? Well, there’s really no ’so what’ to it. We’re clearly not pumping the stock - we’re telling you to lock in profits while you can before a pullback. We’re not even ‘covering’ the stock anymore. We’re just answering any potential questions that may pop up from this follow up discussion. (Normally we’d just drop the coverage and topic altogether, but this is important enough to discuss.)
In any case, that’s what we see right now - simply a chance to lock in a near-term gain, if not for your whole trade, then at least part of it. Just something to think about.
By the way, if you missed out on the bulk of the CEL-SCI (CVM) gain because you didn’t get our initial recommendation, don’t miss out again - subscribe to our newsletter today.
–
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Your article is clear and fair. However, I do not understand why you would not continue to cover this stock. Please explain. I am thinking of subscribing and have interest in stocks like HGSI, SPPI, INCY, KERX, CVM, and of course any potential recommendations. Therefore, do you follow the aforementioned regularly? “The Crammer” and “Adam F” enjoy the guys at the top too much and find disfavor with most of these stocks, but if insiders have spent their hard money to purchase, excluding stock gifts and awards, then it seems reasonable to invest too.
Jay-O
Editor’s response: Hey Jay-o, thanks for the question. It’s probably worth clarifying, sooo….
We have no problem with the stock. However, the format for the Small Cap Network site changed in April. Previously we were biased (since we accepted cash/stock from companies to present their opportunity to our readers). Now, we’re 100% unbiased…. I can say and write whatever I want to, with no obligation or pressure from a sponsor company.
Since Cel-Sci was one of our former client customers, there was the potential perception that we were somehow unbiased in our coverage of the company. So, to avoid even the risk of that, we decided to not even touch it going forward. Our obligation to CVM was transferred to our sister site, OTC Journal (where you’ll find all the coverage of CVM you can handle).
The reason I made those comments a few weeks ago was simply that it was an extrardonary opportunity that at least needed to be addressed. It wasn’t something I was totaly comfortable doing, but I was even more uncomfortable not saying something along the lines of ‘take profits now’.
In any case, yes we do follow up with some of our picks, though not all of them. If it’s just a ticker we mention in passing in a community article, then we may or may not follow up with it. If it’s an official pick that we publish in the newsletter, we do follow up with it…. good or bad. All those published picks appear here: http://www.smallcapnetwork.com/Open_Stock_Picks/af/trading_alerts/
That being said, you should also know that most of our official newsletter picks are taken from the ideas we mention in the community articles.
I strongly suggest you go ahead and subscribe to the newsletter, just to make sure you get all of our picks and best commentary.
Comment by Jay-O — 10/9/2009 @ 3:10 pm
bought @.16 three months ago after reviewing an elderly adviser’s review of the co. and and he advised to hold on for long term gains.
BOY l’m glad l did. wished that l had bought 5 to x 10 the amount.
Comment by carl torjusen — 9/22/2009 @ 6:04 pm