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.
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.
I would definitely prefer a pill such as Bucillamine over pax if it is proved to be just as effective .....because it has a solid longer term safety record. They have to get past the FDA first though. That's no walk in the park. Just ask the dozens of other small biotechs who tried and failed during the pandemic.
I've never heard of a vax provider claiming 100% effective. Never. Let's stick with the facts.
All it will take is a PR to make TA look very bad. Or an earnings report or heavy insider buying or selling. By itself, TA has a lot of losers so religiously using stop losses is a critical success factor if it is the only trading style used. IMO it's best to use a hybrid style by integrating TA with FA. Diff strokes...
Not true. Different studies are floating around (not by pfizer), but IMO many of them are flawed in one form or another. They often even admit it.
I stand corrected though. I meant to post that studies are showing that pax appears to reduce the likelyhood of becoming a long hauler. Here is a VA study.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/06/health/paxlovid-long-covid-va-study
However, pax appears to have a higher incident of rebounders than placebo groups.
RVVTF will need to address all of this with their pill when the time is right (if they get EUA). If they were smart they would have included some of this analysis in their current study. JMHO.
I'm encouraged by SOBR hiring Marius Karoy as Director of Commercial Development. At this juncture in the business plan, SALES needs to be the focus. I'd like to see some progress in this area by YEND.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sobrsafe-adds-proven-revenue-catalyst-130000039.html
Dachs, the OTC is a long-term graveyard for 90% of the stocks in this space. iHUB used to have a graveyard board. Long term it is usually the R/S that wipes out the SH. The PPS going to zero or near-zero is much more rare event. Holding OTC stocks long-term is almost always a disaster. It's the reality of the situation, and I continue to be amazed at how many investors seem so shocked and upset when they lose their money here. This is a very risky space to invest in. It's not for the naive. And the scammers rarely ever suffer any serious consequences. The SEC simply does not have the resources to chase all of the crooks. It's the way it is, and most likely the way it will continue to be for the foreseeable future.
The OTC is 'great' for flipping and swing trading though!!!!
It's most likely over for QNTA, but I've occasionally seen skeletons rise above the ashes and spark new life. But I wouldn't get your hopes up.
JMHO
A recent study just announced that apparently Pax reduces the probability of rebounding by 92%.
The problem as I see it is the Paxlovid pill (since it is approved via EUA) is ONLY made available to those of age 65 or older, or if they meet the definition of 'at high risk'. They publish a list of diseases needed to qualify. This means the average Mary Jane or John Doe will not have access to the pill because it is EUA (not fully approved). That seriously limits the 'reach' of the pill to other fellow human beings. I'm not sure if buccy would have the same limitations as EUA. I guess it woiuld depend on the safety protocol and experience.
That's a great point. BTW, what safeguards have mgmt at SOBR put in place to prevent users from cheating. The device sensor reads the alcohol in the humidity from the finger. What happens if the user spreads a film of something onto the fingers to block the humidity (ex: vasoline)? Has mgmt addressed the issue of cheating and fooling the device?
Technical Analysis (TA) works "great"!, until Fundamental Analysis (FA) comes along and pulls the rug out from under it. There is nothing like a surprise PR to make TA look bad. TA is a great tool to complement FA though.
Did you qualify for "Paxlovid" (the pill)? That knocked it out for me within 5 days.
What SOBR needs is one good contract deal (revenues) to get it off the ground. When that deal is eventually announced, that should give the PPS a shot in the arm.
SOBR is over sold.
The PR is a Great Beginning!!!
Per NRX.... excerpt
Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
On November 12, 2022, NRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“NRx” or the “Company”) entered into a Settlement Agreement and Asset Purchase Agreement (“APA”) with Relief Therapeutics Holding AG and Relief Therapeutics International (the “Relief Parties”) to settle the outstanding lawsuit with respect to the Binding Collaboration Agreement dated September 18, 2020 between the Company and the Relief Parties (the “Collaboration Agreement”).
Under the APA, the Company has agreed to transfer to the Relief Parties all of the Company’s interest in ZYESAMI (or the “Product” as such term is defined in the Collaboration Agreement), including intellectual property, FDA applications, clinical trial data, drug and API inventory and certain contractual rights. The Company has agreed to refrain from developing any product for any indication that uses or otherwise exploits the Product without the Relief Parties’ consent.
The Relief Parties have agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop, market, and commercialize the Product, but has sole discretion to select the indications for which it will seek to develop the Product. Although the Company intends to monitor the progress of the Relief Parties under the APA and enforce the Company’s rights thereunder, there can be no assurances that the Relief Parties will be successful at commercializing the Product.
GENEVA and RADNOR, Pa., Nov. 14, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- RELIEF THERAPEUTICS Holding SA (SIX: RLF, OTCQB: RLFTF, RLFTD) ("Relief"), and NRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: NRXP) ("NRx Pharmaceuticals"), today announced that they have entered into definitive settlement agreements to resolve their pending litigation. As part of the settlement, at a closing to be held within the next 30 days, (i) NRx Pharmaceuticals will transfer to Relief all of the assets that it previously used in its aviptadil development program, including its regulatory filings, patent applications, clinical data, and the formulation of the aviptadil product it was previously developing, (ii) Relief will have the exclusive right and control going forward and the obligation to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize an aviptadil product, (iii) Relief has agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to continue the existing Right to Try Program for aviptadil in the United States for at least 2 years, (iv) Relief will pay NRx Pharmaceuticals milestone payments if it can successfully obtain commercial approval of an aviptadil product (whether for COVID-19 or any other indication), (v) Relief will pay NRx Pharmaceuticals royalties based on a percentage of future sales of an aviptadil product (whether for COVID-19 or any other indication), up to a maximum of $30 million in the aggregate, (vi) NRx Pharmaceuticals has agreed not to compete in the development of an aviptadil product in the future, and (vii) at the closing, Relief and NRx Pharmaceuticals will dismiss their pending litigation. There can be no assurances that Relief will be successful at commercializing the aviptadil product.
They finally settled and RLFTF got the best side of the deal !! This is a major win for RLFTF...........
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/relief-therapeutics-holding-sa-nrx-063000660.html
Pretty cool demo of how the device works. Demo starts at the 1 min mark.
https://vimeo.com/768713306
Lots of buy orders coming in on the Time & Sales monitor. Pushing the price up.
I personally do not trust what any CEO says of any sub-penny stock. It's all a huge calculated gamble.
IMO this stock price will go nowhere for 3-5 years. That's been my assumption all along. It's a long term play. Tim has a lonngggggg row to hoe here.
Due to this long-term perspective, out largest risk (IMO) is a devastating R/S due to the obscene O/S. However, Tim has gone "on record" that he will never do an R/S while on his watch. RISK = what if he sells out to some party who will do one!!@
The US Government should get involved and mandate random testing of school bus drivers, with SBOR technology of course.
oodtw, I'm not following that other ticker because I own my shares via the OTC. I'm not looking forward to the day when they force me to convert my shares to ADRs...... unless they have some great news to report to go along with it.
SOBRsafe to Present at the Sidoti & Company Investment Conference
https://www.benzinga.com/pressreleases/22/11/ac29624142/sobrsafe-to-present-at-the-sidoti-company-investment-conference
IMO... I think Arthur will stop reading after your first sentence.
Reversion to the Mean (RTM) says she has much further to run.
pegs, there is also another treatment related to stem cells that appears to be having some success under 'right to try'. Although I'm not sure if it is appropriate for your situation. It's over on the TSOI ihub board.
SOBR pops up as a buy signal from my SO (sell off) strategy). Lots of rules behind that strategy, hence an SO signal is rare for me. I'm in and up 10% at the moment.
So, maybe we'll learn something tomorrow.
GENEVA, SWITZERLAND / ACCESSWIRE / October 26, 2022 / RELIEF THERAPEUTICS Holding SA (SIX:RLF)(OTCQB:RLFTF)(OTCQB:RLFTY) ("Relief"), today announced that they and NRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("NRx") have agreed to extend the stay of their pending litigation until November 7, 2022 to allow time for the parties to finalize their tentative litigation settlement. There can be no assurance that the parties will successfully complete their proposed settlement.
Again, the FDA doesn't care squat about the secondary endpoint if the primary fails. So the design of the primary endpoint criteria is critical for success. It's a simple concept to grasp.
No spin will change those facts.
That's exactly with relief did. As the virus evolved and SOC evolved, the FDA permitted them to change the parameters surrounding their primary endpoints. So the situation is similar in that respect. The general thinking (arm chair quarterbacking) is the primary endpoints were too rigid, and the secondary endpoint should have been the primary endpoint.... because there was success with the secondary endpoint. It's all about endpoint design, and 'getting it right'.
Regarding the NIH study and aviptadil, you are incorrect regarding the secondary endpoint. Here is an excerpt...
In this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial among critically ill patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure, we did not reach statistical significance (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 0.86–3.11) on the primary end point of being alive and free of respiratory failure at 60 days. There was a two-fold, statistically significant increased odds of day 60 survival (the key secondary end point) (p = 0.035).
Full study results....
https://journals.lww.com/ccmjournal/Fulltext/2022/11000/The_Use_of_IV_Vasoactive_Intestinal_Peptide.1.aspx?fbclid=IwAR0_feyIsWpE0jFpZASAjg_q5hJxVIT5GApgUYJ5_dqrJODYb8uat4s-RGc
So, why the 6 day down slide in price? What has accounted for that pull back?
Well let's hope that mf gets it right this time. This is precisely what tripped up RLFTF. They redid the primary endpoint towards the end of the P3 trial. The FDA approved it. But in the end they still did not 100% meet the 'primary' endpoint, even though they performed very will with the 'secondary' endpoints. The FDA rejected them because they missed the primary. The FDA could care less about the secondary endpoints even though the secondary can demonstrate great safety and efficacy.
This is very risky business when you are working with the FDA. I've always felt that Congress should appoint an oversight committee to ensure that the FDA key decision makers are 1) competent 2) not corrupt. IMO the lucrative PDUFA fees seriously bias (and corrupt) the FDA in their decision making. Last year Project Veritas recorded an undercover video/audio with an FDA decision maker which brought a lot of this to light. It is what it is.
FDA EUA approval is 100% linked to meeting the 'Primary Endpoints'. Absolutely NOTHING else matters.... no matter how good it is!!! Gotta meet the 'Primary Endpoints', or the FDA will reject it. This is exactly what happened to other promising small biotechs during the pandemic.
So the entire success or failure hinges on how well thought out the design of the "endpoints" are. Secondary endpoints do not matter.
You have me curious now. How will they pay the price?
No, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is I have better things to do with my time than to grieve all day and night over this. Try to look for a silver lining. Maybe ....... learn from your mistakes in trading risky penny stocks.
Not anymore. Why would they. It serves to purpose anymore.
What's a bit puzzling is the float is still relatively low at 114,918,316.
At a half a billion shares O/S, this thing is ripe for an R/S. Unfortunately.