InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 122
Posts 6384
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/17/2014

Re: Pyrrhonian post# 62750

Tuesday, 05/24/2016 1:18:22 PM

Tuesday, May 24, 2016 1:18:22 PM

Post# of 691164
I’ve been posting about co-endpoints well before you mentioned it.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=122240532

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=120345823&txt2find=evaluate

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121375378&txt2find=AVII

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=122261567

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=122270840

The difference between us is that I see that the vaccine is contributing to overall survival. If the co-endpoint is not approved, then the study will have to prove a strong secondary endpoint of OS. Now that I know it uses the appropriate activation methods and avoids your freeze thaw concern, I can review prior results and see that they contributed to survival. What I need to wait for, just like everyone else, is whether the difference will be significant. I invested on a chance of that.

But to be clear I have not initiated a "buy"recommendation, at that level or any level since I started screaming "misleading" tendencies at the high . Even though you state that I did, you're wrong. You confuse my post of me trying to help people strategically add to dollar cost average. Me trying to convince Allie to sell didn't work. Me warning people not to buy, as they could lose it all. Me stating I sold out even the few shares I bought around the FR rule, and instead I only bought far out options as I couldn’t stand being long, and watching MGMT destroy the investment opportunity (the OS one I saw). Me telling folks even last month that $1.40 that more damage was in store, the shorts being in control.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=122230122

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=122239178

And I've already proven to you that I foresaw these price levels in January. I actually referenced $.70s within my post back then.

Even now when I'm asked about this stock I let folks know how risky it is, and even suggest folks stay away. So bogus, I did not have this on my buy list. It represents a very risk buy, because no one knows how capital raises will work out. The company operates in secrecy. And they have misleading tendencies. I only bought shares based on the science. Recently, I came across the Regents agreement which proves when the INDs were written, and what patents are pertinent to this Phase III (a.k.a, activation methods are fine). That gave me a little more security in the science. And that made me want to have some shares as opposed to far out options. Where they do capital raises matters. And so I decided to get back in on a price that is the least risk. Taking my own advice, where I recommended that IF folks buy (as in add), that they do so where Woodford would, below $1. I continue to believe DCVax-L is helping patients live longer, OS. I continue to worry about PFS as an endpoint coming in short due to imaging standards. And this current SP takes into account depressive capital raises. And I continue to believe in the merits of testing the science. The price is at risk/reward entry levels, but that doesn't mean it can't drop if the silence continues. I just think that it will recover to these levels easily once any good news comes in.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=119732727

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=120165394

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=120154754

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121373258
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NWBO News