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.
Soj all the best look forward to your return (at a higher SP!)
abc: pqr here. Very good question you ask of our prolific friend HyGro. Inquiring minds want to know! Happy Holiday to All of Good Will.
Gary I had forgotten your medical condition. Many many blessings to you for your courage, perseverance and terrific attitude.
I very much hope we meet. Preferably soon and after NWBO success but meet regardless.
Ladygray - blessings, kind thoughts and prayers to you
ATL/Ike: “In extremely broad terms, statistical significance means that it’s likely that something is happening, while clinical significance verifies to what extent that thing is happening. Put another way: statistical significance seeks to disprove a negative, and say an event probably didn’t happen by chance; clinical significance seeks to prove a positive, and say an event did happen in a particular, measured manner.”
Ike/Doc- I understood Doc to be asking about use of statistical correlations as evidence in a civil matter. I have no experience in criminal but I cannot imagine the same would be admissible criminally.
Ike/Doc Logic: Statistics apparently are accepted as evidence in securities fraud litigation. My cursory reading of the article from which I provide the below quote ties disclosure to share price. I would think that disclosure of demonstrably false information (if that could be shown) could be used in conjunction with share price decline.
I have a question whether statistical evidence would be sufficient to overcome a Summary Judgment motion or would be admissible only as to other issues (damages, specifically). From the reference to “fraud” claims in the excerpt it seems perhaps both applications.
“The event study—a statistical tool borrowed from financial economics—has become a critical tool in securities fraud litigation. In litigation, event studies are used to measure the extent to which market prices react to the release of new information. Their results are introduced as evidence on the efficiency the market in which the securities trade, the impact of the fraudulent disclosures on market prices, the causal relationship between the fraud and plaintiff’s economic harm, and the appropriate calculation of damages. Courts vary both in the extent to which they require the use of an event study and the degree to which they accept other evidence with respect to these issues, but a properly-conducted event study is often a key factor.
Here’s the blurb:
Hi Dan. I appreciate Vikings perspective and disclosure/information sharing. Just trying to keep things cordial. Best to All
Doc Tx!
Bio and all - thanks.
MAA filing question - materiality. Flip’s comment that MAA filing is material I don’t think is accurate but anyone with more specific knowledge pls correct me here. The absence of the submission of an application which submission is not a mandated requirement (as here) would not be material due to its non-mandatory nature. OTOH the taking of a positive but discretionary event (MMA application filing) would not require disclosure of that event on any particular timeline, either. IMO. Flip’s insightful comment about the absence of an affirmative denial on August 22, however, seems (is hoped to be) intentional. GLTA
Dear Horseb4 thanks and amen to your sentiments (no pun intended) with respect to knowledgeable posters here and acknowledging their generous sharing of that knowledge, experience and opinion. GLTA.
Thanks E223. Very interesting as usual.
ae kuester thx as always. Pls what is SPPP you reference?
Hey Planters Wart (or is it just, “Wart”): Good show on the jokes and rhymes. Appreciate the thought provoking posts and for sure the referrals to treatment protocols. Have a great weekend maybe one of these Mondays we’ll all wake up to a nice PR, JA, or material approval and MAA application filing!
ae; What’s missing? Answers to all of the above
Onco: Totally speculative BS. If you talked to DI at all you would know he’s all in, chomping to get to the next steps. Perhaps I am ignorant/naïve but I don’t think most ppl can simply lie at will, there are others in management who take the same positive position, and finally, i don’t see how actively misleading with a positive narrative benefits insiders at least in the present situation. Were that the case I’m sure DI and others could come up with far more compelling pumps artfully drafted to avoid negative repercussions.
Horse: for better or worse, still holding all shares. Quite a few for a little guy…
PM: or obtain short term financing from one of their angels or LP herself? Just something that I would have expected could have been done more efficiently which is hard to understand if everything is as hunkey-dorey as we are to conclude.
PM - when I want to buy a car I don’t sell the furniture in my house (at distressed pricing) to raise funds. I get a loan. I am not really fully understanding having the company sell furniture.
No apology to anyone merited or needed. Onco never relied on anything you or others said, IMHO.
Horse: I only chilled a split anticipating 5/10 as that seemed hopeful but inconsistent with previously announced JA/series of compelling PRs. Not smart enuf tho to sell as did Fireman and probably some others. Two lessons: Wait for real news and sell some when the opportunity presents. ‘Nuff said.
Hey Double-DD. Not too sure abt the allegory since the Wizard was smoke and mirrors, however I believe it will happen in some form not terribly dissimilar to your vision and in the meantime, I appreciate the advice. Have a great … evening, week, month … month and a half(?!!?).
Doc I agree with all. However, the incentive would seem to be in the opposite direction (a bit of an “admission against interest” if you will allow). So I have felt the denial of delay based upon the absence of an official statement of some sort about ECAs was probably accurate. FWIW.
Flip sorry - what does this mean please?
Lock: I think you may be on to something! Or maybe PM just wants a bigger park bench and an umbrella, already!
Judge - Your Honor - thanks for the post and sticking around. Best! PS where’s the introductory disclaimer? Anyway not necessary we all know what it says!!
WI - thank you for your comment and a very good weekend to you and yours.
Thx PM. Pleasant evening to you.
PM I agree. This was a surprise. Believe tho upcoming cash needs for applications/submissions. But selling at .62 - ugh.
Poor Man: At the one-yard line. So to say…
IMO the absence of ASM speaks for itself with regard to the company’s perception of the strategic materiality of a JA. I can see that concern being trumped by some ultimate development - MHRA approval being the obvious - however the timing of that possibility does not seem to suit management’s ASM obligation. So here we sit.
No bc there has not been a public offering. Also whatever is “TLD” is subject to interpretation.
Pity. Clearly
BSB: thanks. Have a great day!
He is an individual investor. GLTU
Stonk- I believe it is a misinterpretation of IWAD’s post that the company is presently selling or willing to sell Class C shares to individual investors. I was confused about this point and he kindly clarified for me that this is not the case.
CO thx for clarification of newly authorized Class C shares.