Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Of it is corrupt! They take bribes by way of the PDUFA fees. Unfortunately the government has enabled them to become corrupt.... all legal. Just unethical. That is our politicians at work! I'm sure that there are some political kickbacks in there buried somewhere.
Want proof. How about undercover operation on tape. Here is the link. Scroll to the bottom and watch Part 1 and Part 2. https://www.projectveritas.com/
Not according to certain ""knowledgeable"" revive commentators.....apparently everything the fda, cdc and nih had/have been doing for decades, with special focus on their covid response, has always been open and above board.
To be succinctly direct, such as these obviously have no relationship with reality.
Still holding & hoping,why not, down so much it don`t really matter.
CW....I`m with you,thought I would be living the high life by now but still
digging ditches. Doing a sewer & water project at Abbott Labs in my area
thinking about telling them I will do the job for free if they put a offer in to buy
Revive for 5 billion.
I doubt he knows whats its like about working your as...off physically at least just chilling in office since he got some degree lol...sorry don't want to be negative. Yea I come home dirty from machinist work still wearing my n95 as 2 others ... but this is why I'm holding as I already know this possibility...
Many know he has 40 plus years bio tech investing.
Wait until you see the Data. It could very well be worth several hundred million dollars. Stock price reflects busted endpoints, not the data. Watch and learn.
— Rex Wiggins (@RexWiggins12) June 9, 2023
I hope Michael Frank worked his a$$ off today because I did with over 100 degree heat index. Unfortunately, I may have to do this for two more years if things don't change soon.
This is very old news. Dr Fahy said this about bucillamine years ago.
The Golden Knights are up 3 games to 1 and are the best team on paper, your twisted logic says we should cancel game 5 and hand them the Cup...right? Your misguided belief that research equals a clinical trial is delusional and completely out of touch with any semblance of reality.
Cool it snoop. If you want to sue anyone then sue frank for screwing up this trial as bad as he has. If the drug is so good then he really screwed the pooch by only getting a little over 700 people in this trial. The usual people here will blame the trial managers but frank is ceo so it falls back on him. He can’t take credit for anything if he is unwilling to take responsibility for the failures.
The establishment is corrupt. That's WTF is going on. Plain and simple.
WTH is going on here? WTH is wrong with the FDA!! Did anyone see this?
The researchers found that Omicron variants were particularly sensitive to an antioxidant called bucillamine, which is in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Revive Therapeutics to evaluate its safety and efficacy.
https://www.utoronto.ca/news/u-t-researchers-find-vulnerability-covid-19-variants-reduces-transmissibility
We all should sue the FDA for F up our Money. The FDA's failure to approve bucillamine despite favorable study results is extremely aggravating. This is the third time I see a study has had a positive light on bucillamine!!
News / announcements could drop any day. We would think that potential deals involving Revive's (patented) "Bucillamine" are being discussed in parallel with the FDA process. Plus we should remember that Bucillamine is not only a potential treatment for Covid symptoms but also proven to be very effective for Rheumatoid Arthritis for example. If the FDA does not swing our way for a Covid treatment after all, this whole process has at least significantly increased exposure for, and the knowledge of, Bucillamine on the big stage.
Exactly so!!!......small ""bites"" do add up over time and as evidenced by the fda's return to selectively lacking urgency re drug approvals, it may be some time before we experience significant pps movement..
With the last capital raise his 30k per month salary is safe. Revive shareholders are a cash cow for him. Why should he do anything?
I'm sorry for your losses. I feel your pain.
News bulletin numpt.......Ive long recouped my entire investment, and then some so where ye got this idiotic idea that "im down" is beyond me,.....been openly stating that for months now.
I have transformed from bullish to neutral. I slowly made the switch when this CEO dragged his feet 'out of the gate' when he got the green light to start the FDA P3 trial.
Bullshite.......from day one it was an anti-revive drone and only came here from the relief scam board to vent when that pos kept diluting its value into oblivion.
The hub's history has the receipts to expose those lies in full.......how embarrassing! lololsss
To recognize such a pattern and not exploit it would be foolish.
IMO
Let’s not get excited over the gains today. We have seen this over and over. Big rise one day and two days later we are below where we started at before the rise. The only thing that will make this thing rise and stay will be the pr stating mf has been booted out of the company for breaching his fiduciary duty to the shareholders. However we know that won’t happen because the board doesn’t have the balls to do it.
A very encouraging rise in PPS today for sure. Excited for this continuation.
I saw that this morning and see they now include a correction that Bucy is not FDA approved yet in the USA. That is quite a blunder to make in a press release and made me question the authentication of all the leg work put into the study. Errors like that can't happen and is embarrassing to the authors. However, as evidenced by gains today, people took interest. Cheers to seeing the actual 710 data any day now. We know this stuff is gold. The problem is nobody else does.
GLTA (even Snoopy)
Well said…couldn’t agree with you more.
There’s plenty of “disingenuous sincerity”. I'm right there with you. There are still some things to be hopeful for with this stock.
Yet, there is a constant barrage a lols, unnecessary drivel that seems to be aimed at poking fun of holders, rather than where the attention should be directed which is peeling back the layers to find the disconnects, short falls, and potential “corruption”.
This is like a few others that I hold, where you know that the stock should be doing at least a little better than what it is, but something fishy seems to be suppressing it. Not AT ALL to absolve leadership for missteps or failed opportunity taking. But sometimes theres more than just that.
I'm sorry for your losses. I feel your pain. I have transformed from bullish to neutral. I slowly made the switch when this CEO dragged his feet 'out of the gate' when he got the green light to start the FDA P3 trial. He had at least 6 months to prepare while waiting for the FDA signal. Once the green light came he was like ... Duhhh, what do I do next? It then took him months to get his feet off the ground. Then he posts a lot of garbage about the future of 'shrooms'.
IMO, there is a very high probability that the whole chase after EUA was smoke and mirrors in order to sustain a higher PPS for him to dilute into. Over time his shroom dreams fizzled so he became a little more interested in the FDA initiative, but it was too late. COVID is over, and his O/S is growing with no results to show the SH. It doesn't help matters that this CEO has ZERO communication skills.
I tell you how it is. Take it or leave it.
Youve spewed nothing but garbage about revive since 2020 so i find your ""bullish"" claim to be nothing but a laughable fabrication......the receipts are there for all to see!
After exposing that obvious LIE theres no need to respond to the remaining nonsense contained in that post...............
NOTE: Curious how some here claim to care about the treatment of shareholders that suffered huge losses, yet same poster(s) do nothing but appear here daily to gloat about said posters losses......how ironic. lololsss
#gobshites
My expectations of penny stock CEO's is very, very minimal. 98% of them are driven by greed, and they will screw over the SH if it benefits them. It is what it is. Swing Trading is the only smart way to trade penny stocks trading below a dime. 98% of the time the CEO's "End" goals are never met. They lure in investors to chase a very low probability dream. They get rich, the common SH loses. This is what I've learned the hard way. I was only in RVVTF for the unlikely event they would win the EUA. Without that, I'm seeing the glass as half empty. JMHO
Terrible how they treated investors in the last capital raise at .15 a share now look
What is mf response. “They knew the risk”
Terrible
I've seen many of R/S happen with the o/s at 500m Of course they will use the old excuse that they need it to uplist to the NASDAQ. That's a worn out excuse. They all use it.
OK...nothing wrong with viewing the glass as half full if one is a stuck long. What other choice is there.
Considering this CEO's slowwww track record, I just believe that it will be 2024 or 2025 before the results of a new trial will ever be disclosed to the SH. Over that time, a whole lot of things can happen (good, bad or ugly) behind the curtain with a penny stock like this. I used to be bullish with this. Now I'm neutral (at best). GLTY.
Here ye go again with these incessant nonsensical, and repetitive narrative driven statements re Revive.
NO, they are not back to ""Base One" and again, NO, they are not "several years away" based of your metrics.
Acquisition of the specific data that the FDA may require will not take extremely long IF Revive indeed gains a BP partner, whose input will undoubtedly speed up and streamline the process.
Undoubtedly the FDA seems to have reverted to the pre-pandemic system of operation when it comes to approvals (except when it involves BP of course), ie, the slow and supposedly methodical approach and as such this may turn out to be a time consuming exercise.
Fortunately for some of us that is NOT an issue since this was catered for long beforehand, ie during the extended period of volatility between 2020-2022.
Also the idea that Revives OS will ever approach the atrocity that was seen with that scam, ie Relief (4.4Bil OS) is pure bollocks, and as such any veiled suggestion or implication of same is obviously asinine!!!
Here's another great quote from the PR.
"Planning the Study’s close-out procedures and final reporting to the FDA and IRB."
"There can be no assurance that the Company will proceed with the clinical development and regulatory approvals of Bucillamine for COVID-19 in the U.S. and internationally."
This is a noticeable change from previous PRs. We have not seen this kind of wording or tone from MF in the past. Judge for yourselves.
"Narcissistic amateur" arm chair quarter backs panhandling meaningless FUD for cheap $RVVTF shares is embarrassing.
Indeed, The Fat Lady does remain silent.
The $RVVTF stadium hecklers are always annoying
All I know or think lol, is the comapny needs to listen to what Bmt is saying, find a fcking way to show Bucillamine works like what he is probably right about with Symptoms... . even Long Covid prevention.
Ps. yea never been a mf cheerleader or hater always hope he might prove reddit and others wrong Lol....
Pps. edibles help with wait lol
It’s unfortunate. Personally when it comes to my health for most all indications I work to be an informed patient and not rely solely on modern medicine or drs.
Been working out for me and thankful I took the initiative
Glta
Giovanni...yes, and I've read somewhere that the FDA must recall 2,500+ (maybe this is a little high) drugs every year due to risks of injury. One may ask .... how does this happen? IMO, this happens because of PDUFA. The FDA receives $$$ (PDUFA fees) from every drug that is approved and sold on the market. This is a conflict of interest, and provides the FDA with an incentive to approve drugs that should have never been approved. These fees also result (IMO) in the FDA being biased towards the BPharmas that will generate the highest PFUFA fees....leaving the little biotech (ex: RVVTF, RLFFD, etc) out of the equation.
PDUFA fees came about so as to provide the FDA with $ resources to help expedite the approval of drugs (a good thing for consumers). But instead it's just provided a vehicle for corruption.
Congress should end PDUFA fees, thereby remove the incentive for corruption. IMO RVVTF is too small to generate a enough PDUFA fees to get the attention of the FDA. JMHO
Harvard University says: Prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death.
Risky Drugs: Why The FDA Cannot Be Trusted
July 17, 2013
by Donald W. Light
A forthcoming article for the special issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (JLME), edited by Marc Rodwin and supported by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, presents evidence that about 90 percent of all new drugs approved by the FDA over the past 30 years are little or no more effective for patients than existing drugs.
All of them may be better than indirect measures or placebos, but most are no better for patients than previous drugs approved as better against these measures. The few superior drugs make important contributions to the growing medicine chest of effective drugs.
The bar for “safe” is equally low, and over the past 30 years, approved drugs have caused an epidemic of harmful side effects, even when properly prescribed. Every week, about 53,000 excess hospitalizations and about 2400 excess deaths occur in the United States among people taking properly prescribed drugs to be healthier. One in every five drugs approved ends up causing serious harm, while one in ten provide substantial benefit compared to existing, established drugs. This is the opposite of what people want or expect from the FDA.
Prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death. Deaths and hospitalizations from over-dosing, errors, or recreational drug use would increase this total. American patients also suffer from about 80 million mild side effects a year, such as aches and pains, digestive discomforts, sleepiness or mild dizziness.
The forthcoming article in JLME also presents systematic, quantitative evidence that since the industry started making large contributions to the FDA for reviewing its drugs, as it makes large contributions to Congressmen who have promoted this substitution for publicly funded regulation, the FDA has sped up the review process with the result that drugs approved are significantly more likely to cause serious harm, hospitalizations, and deaths. New FDA policies are likely to increase the epidemic of harms. This will increase costs for insurers but increase revenues for providers.
This evidence indicates why we can no longer trust the FDA to carry out its historic mission to protect the public from harmful and ineffective drugs. Strong public demand that government “do something” about periodic drug disasters has played a central role in developing the FDA.2 Yet close, constant contact by companies with FDA staff and officials has contributed to vague, minimal criteria of what “safe” and “effective” mean. The FDA routinely approves scores of new minor variations each year, with minimal evidence about risks of harm. Then very effective mass marketing takes over, and the FDA devotes only a small percent of its budget to protect physicians or patients from receiving biased or untruthful information.34 The further corruption of medical knowledge through company-funded teams that craft the published literature to overstate benefits and understate harms, unmonitored by the FDA, leaves good physicians with corrupted knowledge.5 6 Patients are the innocent victims.
Although it now embraces the industry rhetoric about “breakthrough” and “life-saving” innovation, the FDA in effect serves as the re-generator of patent-protected high prices for minor drugs in each disease group, as their therapeutic equivalents lose patent protection. The billions spent on promoting them results in the Inverse Benefit Law: the more widely most drugs are marketed, the more diluted become their benefits but more widespread become their risks of harm.
The FDA also legitimates industry efforts to lower and widen criteria prescribing drugs, known by critics as “the selling of sickness.” Regulations conveniently prohibit the FDA from comparing the effectiveness of new drugs or from assessing their cost-effectiveness. Only the United States allows companies to charge what they like and raise prices annually on last year’s drugs, without regard to their added value.7
A New Era?
Now the FDA is going even further. The New England Journal of Medicine has published, without comment, proposals by two senior figures from the FDA to loosen criteria drugs that allege to prevent Alzheimer’s disease by treating it at an early stage.8 The authors seem unaware of how their views about Alzheimer’s and the role of the FDA incorporate the language and rationale of marketing executives for the industry. First, they use the word “disease” to refer to a hypothetical “early-stage Alzheimer’s disease” that supposedly exists “before the earliest symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease are apparent.” Notice that phrasing assumes that the earliest symptoms will become apparent, when in fact it’s only a hypothetical model for claiming that cognitive lapses like not remembering where you put something or what you were going to say are signs of incipient Altzheimer’s disease. The proposed looser criteria would legitimate drugs as “safe and effective” that have little or no evidence of being effective and expose millions to risks of harmful side effects.
No proven biomarkers or clinical symptoms exist, the FDA officials note, but nevertheless they advocate accelerated approval to allow “drugs that address an unmet medical need.” What “unmet need"? None exists. This market-making language by officials who are charged with protecting the public from unsafe drugs moves us towards the 19-century hucksterism of peddling cures of questionable benefits and hidden risks of harm, only now fully certified by the modern FDA.9
The main reason for advocating approvals of drugs for an unproven need with unproven benefits, these FDA officials explain, is that companies cannot find effective drugs for overt Alzheimer’s. Their drug-candidates have failed again and again in trials. The core rationale of the proposed loosening of criteria is that “the focus of drug development has sifted to earlier stages of Alzheimer’s disease…and the regulatory framework under which such therapies are evaluated should evolve accordingly.” Yet they admit there are no “therapies” in this much larger market where (with the help of the industry-funded FDA) companies will not have to prove their drugs are effective. In fact, these FDA officers propose to approve the drugs without ever knowing if they are therapeutic or not. Their commercialized language presumes the outcome before starting. The job of the FDA, it seems, is to help drug companies open up new markets to increase profits for the FDA’s corporate paymasters.
These two FDA officials maintain that “the range of focus must extend to healthy people who are merely at risk for the disease but could benefit from preventive therapies.” Yet they admit we do not know who is “at risk,” nor whether there is a “disease,” nor whether anyone “could benefit,” nor whether the drugs constitute “preventive therapies.” Similar FDA-encouraged shifts have been made for drugs treating pre-diabetes, pre-psychosis, and pre-bone density loss, with few or no benefits to offset risks of harm. This week, based on policy research at the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, a letter of concern was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The authors write that approval for drugs to treat “early stage Altzheimer’s disease” must meet “a much higher bar – evidence of slowed disease progression.” But without clinical manifestations or biomarkers for an alleged disease, how will such progression be measured?
Advice to readers: Experienced, independent physicians recommend not to take a new drug approved by the FDA until it is out for 7 years, unless you have to, so that evidence can accumulate about its real harms and benefits.10
----
Disclaimer: The assessment and views expressed here are solely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect those of persons or institutions to which he is associated. The comments and suggestions of Gordon Schiff, an expert in prescribing at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and Robert Whitaker are gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. Lexchin J. New drugs and safety: what happened to new active substances approved in Canada between 1995 and 2010? Archives of Internal Medicine 2012 (Nov 26);172:1680-81.
2. Hilts PJ. Protecting America's Health: The FDA, Business and One Hundred Years of Regulation. New York: Alfred A. Knopf; 2003.
3. Rodwin M. Conflicts of interest, institutional corruption, and Pharma: an agenda for reform. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 2012;40:511-22.
4. Rodwin M. Reforming pharmaceutical industry-physician financial relationships: lessons from the United States, France, and Japan. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 2011(Winter):2-10.
5. Sismondo S. Ghost management. PLoS Medicine 2007;4:1429-33.
6. Sismondo S, Doucet M. Publication ethics and the ghost management of medical publication. Bioethics 2010;24:273-83.
7. Schondelmeyer S, Purvis L. Rx Price Watch Report. Washington DC: American Association of Retired Persons 2012.
8. Kozauer N, Katz R. Regulatory innovation and drug development for early-stage Alzheimer's disease. New England Journal of Medicine 2013 (Mar 13);DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1302513
9. Young JH. The Toadstool Millionaires: a social history of patent medicines in America before federal regulation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1961.
10. Schiff G, Galanter W, Duhig J, et al. Principles of conservative prescribing. Archives of Internal Medicine 2011;171:1433-30.
See also: Public Health, Donald Light
FILTER BY RESEARCH AREA
Political Economy and Justice
Institutional Corruption
Government & Law
Diversity, Justice, and Democracy
Public Health
Academia & Non-Profit
Economics
Organizational Psychology
Ethics
TWITTER
HarvardEthicsHarvardEthics Danielle Allen thinks our democracy needs renovation t.co/ajwYWyOyhh via @Harvard
3 days 5 hours ago.
jhdimpact jhdimpact GETTING-Plurality research network members have developed an open and collaborative list of research priorities in response to the recent advances in artificial intelligence. Read more and access the list:t.co/CklC97YnvC
1 week 2 days ago.
HarvardEthicsHarvardEthics Proposals to support high quality history and civic education for students in grades K-5 are due 5/31! Learn more and apply here t.co/fpyszBSWPM t.co/Ogz1FZqB3v
1 week 4 days ago.
acflewis acflewis Fascinating stuff on environmental DNA in the NYT today (in which I'm quoted). Looking forward to thinking about some of the ethical dimensions of this! t.co/u5Vpfr9C5O
2 weeks 4 days ago.
HarvardEthicsHarvardEthics The Edmond & Lily Safra Center for Ethics is pleased to announce the new Fellows-in-Residence and Graduate Fellows for 2023! Learn more about our newest cohorts here t.co/FCDp06aswC
3 weeks 3 days ago.
Follow
RSS Feed Subscribe
124 Mount Auburn Street
Suite 520N
Cambridge, MA 02138 ethics@harvard.edu
p: 617.495.1336
f: 617.496.6104
People here told me the fda is corrupt and bias toward BP. And that revive never had a chance. Is it true?
Well they did hand revive a phase 3 based on safety data from a phase 2 trial done 4 years prior. In 2020 the fda didn’t care what you wanted to try as long as they knew your product wasn’t going to kill anyone. That’s not exactly a deep dive into the product. Fda was desperate.
Benson's a bottom feeder, who enjoys feeding on other's misfortunes. You can tell a lot about a person from the language they use such as, "bro and dude."
OMG LOL! Wrong yet again. And if you really believe the FDA merely handed Revive this opportunity without doing any due diligence of their own then in fact you are the deluded, clueless one.
The two are joined for now however, most of us invested in Revive’s Bucillamine not in Michael Frank per se.
Bet you don’t even know what Bucillamine is and represents. Too much technical detail for $7 postings isn’t it.
Enjoy the dreary basement couch life, sweetheart..and “ciao” for now from Las Vegas!!
You are absolutely correct. The FDA was kind to Revive and allowed them to bypass Phases 1 and 2. Revive did not "progress" to anything. In fact they were spoon-fed a handout from the FDA. Narcissistic amateur is a perfect assessment for this completely incompetent CEO. Some of us saw it a long time ago but so many others worshipped him and still do apparently.
Progressing to a phase 3? Fda was handing those out like candy in 2020. If they actually progressed, meaning going from phase 1 and getting to phase 3, then this would be different however they were given a chance to start at 3 and still couldn’t do anything with it. Being given a phase 3 doesn’t mean anything when you have a narcissistic amateur leading the company.
rick...Unfortunately I have to agree with you. That PR clearly implied that a NEW trial is needed IF the FDA approves the new metric goals. They are back to "Base One" I'm afraid. This is several years away from final FDA approval on anything (at best).
With the O/S over 300M and climbing, I just don't see how the salaries and overall compensation plans can be sustained without an R/S in either 2023 or 2024. All bad news I'm afraid. I've seen this happen far too many times with penny stocks.
Revive Therapeutics staying the course on Phase 3 trial of Bucillamine in Covid-19 patients after meeting with FDA
That "proactive" clown either doesnt know how to read, has somehow received a different Pr to the rest of the public, or yet again Revive has put out an incomplete Pr, because the one I read (multiple times) indicates no such thing.
Revive isnt "staying the course" with the old P3 buccy trial but rather IS ENDING IT!!!
The Pr couldnt be any clearer but somehow that joker puts out this erroneous garbage.
The plan going forward is clearly to assess the data set in hand and then, based on that evaluation, approach the fda re the potential for repurposing and reformulating buccy, in addition to commencing new trials for covid and/or non-covid related disorders
Whether false info is pro Revive or anti Revive (goof crew) is wholly irrelevant......the point is that its inaccurate and should be exposed as such.
That guy is full of shite..............................
The Fat Lady remains silent.
Fudsteerville can kma. We were right
https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/1016408/revive-therapeutics-staying-the-course-on-phase-3-trial-of-bucillamine-in-covid-19-patients-after-meeting-with-fda-1016408.html
$RVVTF is staying-the-course-on-phase-3-trial-of-bucillamine-in-covid-19-patients-after-meeting-with-fda
Ohhhhhh I see. He's handing out Participation Trophies.
Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades
He wants this chalked up as a victory because they “tried”? I can tryout for the Yankees as a hack. Doesn’t mean sh*t
Followers
|
337
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
36642
|
Created
|
02/23/17
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators Classic Warrior |
Scientific Rationale of Bucillamine
Preclinical and clinical studies have demonstrated that reactive oxygen species contribute to the destruction and programmed cell death of pulmonary epithelial cells.1 N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC) has been shown to significantly attenuate clinical symptoms in respiratory viral infections in animals and humans, primarily via donation of thiols to restore antioxidant and to reduce the activity of cellular glutathione 2,3,4,5. Bucillamine (N-(mercapto-2-methylpropionyl)-l-cysteine) has a well-known safety profile and is prescribed in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in Japan and South Korea for over 30 years. Bucillamine, a cysteine derivative with two thiol groups, has been shown to be 16 times more potent as a thiol donor in vivo than NAC 6. The drug is non-toxic with high cellular permeability. The basis of the clinical study will analyze if Bucillamine has the potential, via restoration of glutathione activity and other anti-inflammatory activity, to lessen the negative consequences of SARS-CoV2 infection in the lungs.
| Psilocin Pharma Corp. has developed production solutions for the active compound Psilocybin. Our process encompassed with our intellectual property cover methods of production of Psilocybin based formulations. Psilocin Pharma Corp’s range of products have been engineered to work synergistically with the body's own natural pathways of absorption while offering a contemporary approach to consumption. Psilocin Pharma also has strong relationships with specific lab partners in certain areas like Brazil, where these formulations are legally approved and plan to sell products in these jurisdictions. | |
| |
Mental Health (Depression, PTSD & Anxiety)
|
Supplements for Brain Health & Cognitive Enhancement
|
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |