I'm invested in this, but it's more of a bet on whether the product works as advertised. If it does and there are very few limitations to its application, then it should be an attractive product to the food&beverage industry (use less sweetener without compromising taste? also, potential cost savings? sounds pretty sweet!). The VIC post lays out the investment case very well. It's a long one. There's also good discussion on their message board. I think the author's reasoning makes a lot of sense, assuming the products work. If they don't work as advertised, then I'd be concerned about the counterpoints.
I also really like this idea because of the similarities with past superstocks: the operating leverage, returns on capital, barriers to entry, competitive advantages, large addressable market.
yeah i think only a few % is best so far. But i kinda want to make it bigger to like 8-9%. Just looks like a high probability of a multibagger.
And i scratched intrexon from that list. And would make PIH (the insurance one) bigger. read here why:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2139333-1347-property-insurance-holdings-an-ipo-left-for-dead-with-upside-of-50-percentminus-100-percent?isDirectRoadblock=false&uprof=45
V interesting idea that doesnt seem noticed in the corner of the market. With 100% upside and a catalyst of 1 year.
Also making Lombard risk bigger to like 8% instead of 4%.
Can you share your point of XON ?