RPC: Shares of Radient Pharmaceuticals Corporation started trading again after being halted by the AMEX on Monday when the biotech blog on TheStreet.com raised concerns about comments made by Radient to BioMedReports.
Of note, TheStreet.com changed the title of the said blog post - but did not issue a retraction or reason why the title was changed - that led to the chaos the preceded the stock halt. Radient Pharmaceiticals, in turn, issued a statement during the afternoon hours on Tuesday clarifying its comments and confirming the link to the Mayo Clinic that TheStreet originally stated did not exist.
After Radient issued its statement, shares resumed trading and the RPC share price shot up by 20%.
The ruckus all started when TheStreet's biotech blogger, in response to an interview published on BioMedReports last week, published what should be considered an emotinally-charged hackjob about Radient that sent shares spiraling downward.
Regardless of the content of that hack-job - and the same can be said for the latest "report" by TheStreet - the tone and prose of these blog postings from TheStreet are articulated in such a way that they read more like an eighth grade schoolyard rant than as anything that merits interpretation as relevant.
Unfortunately, the tone is set in the title (even the ones that change with no retraction) and the tone dismisses any relevance to the subject at hand that would be contained in the words within.
It's also painfully obvious that the biotech blogger has a personal beef with BioMedReports. The timing of TheStreet's biotech blog hack-jobs is timed as such that there's no doubt that Feuerstein heavily follows what BMR is putting out, and then follows-up with his own words - kind of like the horse being led around by the carrot.
Since the number one goal of that website is to draw advertising revenue - by attracting clicks - it also looks like TheStreet plays by the rule of 'controversy sells.'
Any type of commotion created by Street article is going to attract interest - whether the interest is fueled by agreeance or disagreeance - and the readers need to keep that in mind when reading through the emotionally-charged rants.
For as bitter a man as he is, Feuerstein has some wits about him because he tends to keep himself straddling the fine line of legalities without quite going over the edge enough to find serious trouble, but the ethics are completely out the window.
It's safe to say, however, ethics don't mean much to guys like Jim Cramer and Adam Feuerstein.
If you've ever seen Cramer's rants on the Internet about how stocks are manipulated and how the little guy gets screwed - and has gotten screwed by his own games - then you'll probably come to the same conclusion.
And the fact that every stock hacked-up by Feuerstein is accompanied by a hoard of Internet bashers that work relentlessly to add to the fear, panic and disarray created by Feuerstein?
Equally as suspicious.
As always, an investor needs to rely on their own DD to figure out what's what and who's who. It's not a wise move to rely on blogs and message boards to be the foundation of taking up or selling an investment position - especially when it looks like a particular post is lined with emotion and or ulterior agenda.
Disclosure: No position.