@NewbieHK Yeah, that's an interesting reflection. The way I think about things is at several levels.
First, a lot of the noise we read on forums involves a large number of retail investors, which for the most part don't have a lot of $ behind their views (although in small caps that's often not true given daily liquidity). Most of it can be ignored - but there are useful nuggets from time to time.
Then, there are a large bunch of advisers and brokers who influence retail $ flows, who sometimes also don't know much about what they are talking and writing about. (We get to hear some of this on Ausbiz on a daily basis!)
This is (in my view) then amplified by the technical traders, who amplify price action in the absence of fundamental information. The longer I spend in this game, the more I come to realise that some serious volumes are influenced by this - over weeks, and months. For example, I get a weekly newsletter called "The Bull" where most of the recommendations appear to be purely momentum-based. (I am not downplaying the importance of technical analysis, other than to say that as a long term investor, its only impact on me is that it can influence and inform the timing of decisions which are based on fundamentals. I have an open mind on this. But actually, it bears no relationship to the value of a business you are considering investing in for 5-10 years.)
The problem is that, as retail investors, this is the "noise" we are exposed to. But it is not the real market and it is important to understand this.
Beyond this "voting", much of the "weight" of the market derives from more serious, and well-informed retail investors, and institutional investors. Their weight is felt beyond today's traded volume or price action. We don't always "see" or "hear" them, because they are less noisey. But they move serious $ over time.
This is why I think smaller caps like $BOT are interesting. They are still too small to be on the radar screen of much of the serious money, yet there is a lot of noise around it, so the market is far from efficient. As an almost "no revenue", pre-approval company, many are treating $BOT like a typical pre-revenue biotech. However, anyone who is reasonably well-informed knows the risk profile is very, very different to what you normally see, as you've highlighted. That's the market inefficiency.
But of course, even at 90% (my number), there is still the 10%. So we'll soon see how well this post ages.
Right or wrong, that's my mental model of smaller cap investing in "hot stocks".