This… THIS? Is One Of Mr. Greebel’s Loss Calculation Experts?

I am not sure what to say about this — Here is the full six page letter, in context. I do not wish to defame him (go see his LinkedIn page — prior to the below he was in some role at Elona Pharma), but… geez:

Because Mr. Prensky does not have a curriculum vitae, we provide the following relevant information relating to Mr. Prensky’s background and experience: From May 1997 through in or about 2015, Mr. Prensky served as Managing Director of Little Bear Investments LLC.

As Managing Director of Little Bear Investments, Mr. Prensky was involved in managing money and assets of his family. From 2003 to 2010, Little Bear also managed the capital of a single partner who subsequently sold his interest back to the Prensky family a short while after 2011. While Managing Director of Little Bear, Mr. Prensky was directly involved in evaluating and considering whether to invest money in approximately one-hundred (100) PIPEs, most of which were in the life sciences area, specifically for public companies that were pre-revenue. Of the approximately 100 PIPEs that Mr. Prensky was involved in evaluating, Mr. Prensky oversaw the investment by Little Bear Investments and/or its affiliates in approximately 15 PIPEs, many of which were in early-stage, life science companies.

In August 2013, Mr. Prensky participated in Retrophin’s $4.50-per-share PIPE, and was the single largest non-institutional investor in that funding round. In or about 2015, Mr. Prensky co-founded and became Chief Executive Officer of LB Pharmaceuticals. Mr. Prensky holds that same position today. From in or about 2007 through in or about 2009, Mr. Prensky also served as a proprietary trader for Koyote Capital. Mr. Prensky attended Yeshiva University for approximately two years, but did not graduate.

Over the years, the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission has sought information from Mr. Prensky about, among other things, other companies, and Mr. Prensky voluntarily provided such information in the interest of assisting government investigations.

In connection with this matter, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York (USAO for the EDNY) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have contacted Mr. Prensky and asked to speak with him at his office on at least two occasions.

The first occasion took place in or about the Fall of 2017 when the USAO for the EDNY and the FBI spent time with Mr. Prensky at Mr. Prensky’s office asking him questions. The second occasion occurred on or about May 31, 2018, when the USAO for the EDNY and the FBI again spent time with Mr. Prensky at Mr. Prensky’s office asking him questions. We have just learned that some of the information provided by Mr. Prensky during the interview in the Fall of 2017 would apparently constitute Brady and Giglio material, and we have asked the USAO for the EDNY to provide copies of all FBI reports and AUSA notes reflecting both of the interviews….”

So… is/was this guy a confidential government informant? Did this guy steal Marty’s thunder, in giving up other hedge funders? Truly bizarre. Was this the best Mr. Greebel could do? Why would anyone assume his view is independent, on loss calculations, in this particular (Retrophin related) case?

I have only more questions, from here. Paging R. West — paging R. WestG’night….


5 thoughts on “This… THIS? Is One Of Mr. Greebel’s Loss Calculation Experts?

  1. R West says:

    Truth of the matter is, biotech stocks don’t have earnings or tangible assets, so per share data doesn’t mean anything. So unless one looks at the number of shares outstanding (which the typical investor doesn’t do), massive share dilution didn’t affect the stock price … biotech stocks just trade on psychology.

    Ironically, in one of Martin’s videos, he pointed out that the SEC 10-K filed for any company has the number of shares outstanding on the front page, and if you flip inside, there’s a stock dilution table … and you better look at that.

    I’m not totally clear on the Retrophin facts, since I’m not sure they reported the dilution accurately; but even if they didn’t report it, you could still find an expert to say that the market typically doesn’t focus on share dilution … because unless an investor has sophisticated advice from someone like Martin, the typical investor wouldn’t think to look at it! So yeah … you could probably find an expert to say that without the extra stock issued, Retrophin’s stock price would have been exactly the same!

    Liked by 1 person

    • condor says:

      Retro phone is and was a reputable company. Mostly Marty paid off his own PERSONAL prior bad debts (created at MSMB — an unaffiliated fund he ran), using valuable Retrophin stock — stealing from the existing Retrophin common stockholders, in effect.

      So — strictly speaking, a valuation of Retrophin matters less than valuation of Marty’s intended payoffs.

      Just from my perspective…



      • R West says:

        I conflated Counts 7 and 8. It gets easier if one separates them:

        For Count 7 … arguably damage is whatever Martin took from Retrophin, so don’t need to worry about share price too much … it’s just how do you value the shares he awarded to others in settlements?

        For Count 8 (the share parking), the Court probably has to get into the impact on market value. But it should be pretty easy now; Judge just copies what she did for Martin’s case.

        So Greebel probably looking at same sentence as Martin. Only difference is, he might get into Canaan University!

        Liked by 1 person

  2. R West says:

    As I recall, one of the Gov’t. arguments was that the PIPE investors were misled and damaged by nondisclosure of the MSMB settlements. So as a PIPE investor, one would assume this PIPER is going to testify that the settlements, if disclosed, would not have affected his decision to invest.

    Question is whether he qualifies as an expert. It’s fair to say, generally courts want to see some education. (Funny thing is, in the securities business they usually don’t emphasize their education – while for lawyers …it’s everything! Just different subcultures.)

    Rest of it doesn’t make a lot of sense .. .just fishing for info. in Gov’t. files that might help… one would think!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.