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.
If NNVC succeeds it will become big pharma itself. Will you change your tune then? I certainly see much about the way the pharmaceutical industry acts that is deserving of criticism. But providing essential funding for the expensive part of drug development (phase 2 and phase 3 trials) in return for a share of the profits is not one of them.
Even if you can tell me the precise valuation of NNVC on the day Flucide is approved, you can't tell me how many shares will be outstanding on that day, so you don't know what the stock price will be.
It's funny how you're getting so hung up on a word. Here are some definitions from various on-line dictionaries:
capitulate:
"to give up all resistance"
"to surrender unconditionally"
"to give up resistance"
Now when one buys a stock one hopes the stock price goes up. But often it goes down. Naturally one is inclined to hold the stock and hope it goes back up, nobody wants to realize a loss. But sometimes the stock keeps going down, and down, and down. This is especially likely with a small start up that has no earnings, where a few years down the road the threat of bankruptcy looms if they can't create a product with enough customers in time. Eventually the price may reach a point where the desire for capital preservation becomes paramount and one gives up resistance to realizing a loss. One surrenders to the realization that the company's prospects aren't at positive as one had thought. One capitulates, and sells the stock at a loss.
I am using "capitulate" in its ordinary sense, not the way some chartist would use it to describe a stock chart.
"NNVC could farm out or license each one of the formulas to other phamaceutical companies even at this time."
Given that none of its formulas has been shown to work in humans, and that none have even been shown to be safe to give to humans, any price that NNVC could get for those formulas at the present time would be shockingly low.
By your reasoning if an investor has held NNVC for a long time, has gotten tired of seeing the price go from 2.00 to 1.00 to 0.70 to 0.50 to 0.44 and bails out in disgust, it is capital preservation. But if 1000 investors have held NNVC for a long time, have gotten tired of seeing the price go from 2.00 to 1.00 to 0.70 to 0.50 to 0.44 and bail out in disgust, it is capitulation.
Frankly, to me this is a distinction of little consequence.
My employer doesn't give a damn what my opinion of NNVC is.
Big pharma is not going to jump in and play sugar daddy any time soon. Are some of them keeping an eye out on NNVC? No doubt. But they won't be offering any money before phase 1 trials are even completed.
Only a very naive person believes government officials when they say that our debt problem is getting better. But that's another matter. The biggest risks for NNVC are not macroeconomic but the usual ones for a start up drug development company.
Panic and despair won't drive the stock to zero, that's true. But investor impatience ("capitulation", if you will) could drive the price to 0.20. Zero won't come unless NNVC declares bankruptcy, which won't happen in the next year or two, but is a possibility further down the road if there are any significant problems revealed in the testing, or if there are substantial and prolonged difficulties in getting the manufacturing facility built.
Please note that I am not making a prediction of 0.20, or any other price. I have no idea what the stock price will be a year from now. I'll just be no more surprised to see 0.20 than 1.00. After all, I'm long this stock. It never surprises me to find that I paid too much for a stock.
Dr. Seymour can "report" me all he bloody well likes. I hope he has better things to do than try to deny people their First Amendment rights. Like get those tox studies done.
I am -- at least for the next year -- holding onto NNVC stock for the same reason. But I just don't see that as a reason why the price can't continue to go lower. After all, all the people selling now also know that *if Flucide gets all the way through the approval process* then it is likely to be a blockbuster drug. Obviously they aren't putting a high probability on the antecedent.
Well, one man's "capitulation" is another man's "capital preservation". After all, what is "panic selling" but an attempt to preserve what little capital one has left?
You're probably right. When I hear a date like "June plus or minus 2-3 months" I interpret that as "September". After all, it is my long experience that in any project uncertainty in timetables always translates into delays, not to early completion. So I expect completion of toxicity studies to be no earlier than the end of 2013, with maybe "first quarter 2014" being more likely. Even so, that will not be the condition that determines the start of phase 1 trials. Completion and certification of the manufacturing facility is. I expect that to be no sooner than middle of 2014, months after completion of the tox studies.
The last thing I would criticize the management of NNVC for is their hiring of consultants. Given that they didn't find it possible to outsource the manufacture of nanoviricides so had to build their own facility, it was obviously necessary to hire the architect, clean room experts, contractors, etc. Unfortunately this development has increased the risk of NNVC -- other drug development start ups don't have to worry about creating their own pill making factories, but NNVC can't even start human trials until it has its manufacturing facility up and running.
Given the downward trend for over 2 years it is clear that the most reliable contrary indicator has been the numerous boosters for this stock. Where was that post tax-loss-selling spike in the price we were supposed to see in January? I guess the decline in price wasn't due to tax loss selling in the first place.
A fact that has not stopped NNVC from going from over $2 to 44 cents in a little over two years.
NNVC has had two solid years of shareholder capitulation. So no wonder TheBunny sounds like a broken record.
The first news that matters -- completion of toxicity studies with (hopefully) no significant toxicity found -- is about a year away. So we probably have another year of shareholder capitulation ahead of us. I have no idea of how low the stock price will go, although right now 0.46 is acting more like a ceiling than a floor.
How does he get the flucide? It won't be available. By your definition there's a "cure" right now -- just steal some Flucide from NNVC's lab.
Each stage of drug testing is more expensive than the previous stage. Phase 1 trials are more expensive than any number of tests on rats. Phase 2 trials are more expensive than phase 1 trials. Phase 3 trials are more expensive than phase 2 trials. If NNVC has successful phase 2 or phase 1/2 trials for Flucide then it will have:
1. A very promising drug candidate.
2. Very little money left for the next stage.
At that point NNVC will either have to raise money by selling shares (hopefully at a much higher price than they are now) or by getting a licensing deal from big pharma. This is perfectly normal for a small, minimally capitalized drug development company and you should expect it. And don't forget to take this perfectly foreseeable dilution into account when you calculate how many zillions of dollars per share your investment will be worth in 4 or 5 years.
My response was to this: "The total amount of money spent by NNVC to get to within 2 years of a cure for a major disease is surprisingly small compared to most other cases."
Having a cure in 2 years does not mean that some big pharmaceutical company has finally gotten sufficient interest in Flucide to put up some money for it. It means that you can go to your doctor and get a prescription for Flucide. I still think that an actual cure, one you can get at your pharmacy, is 5 years away. If the phase 1 and phase 2 trials are successful we will see a big pop in the stock before then, but the cure is 5 years away.
The best way to go broke - misidentify "10% success" companies as "50% success" companies. Obviously no one, including you or me, can precisely determine the odds of any given company succeeding. But speculators know they get far more losers than winners, and expect the big gains of the winners to more than compensate for the numerous losses. Successful investors wait until they have much more certainty, and have fewer losers, but have far fewer 10 baggers too. Most of the big money in the market consists of investors, but there are some real and successful speculators out there. Whether you consider yourself to be an investor or a speculator, the reality is that if you own Nanoviricides stock you are speculating. Don't mistake it for an investment.
Most small businesses fail. So by your reasoning no one would ever invest in any of them. But people keep doing so.
A curious anomaly, I wonder if it's just my broker -- NNVC is showing a Bid of 0.44 but no Ask price at all. WTF?
I'm not asking for such an argument. A cure in two years means first half of 2015. Everybody agrees there will be no human trials until at least one year from now. That means you have a bit over a year to get through phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 trials, and FDA approval, to meet your 2015 deadline. Whooooosh! Seriously, do you really see that as a realistic schedule? Have you ever followed any other drug development?
I'm not joking. There are plenty of super rich families and funds that have hundreds of millions or billions to invest and speculate with. $6 million might be less than 1% of the total capital of those investors. Put 1% into each of a hundred speculations, each of which has a 10% chance of success, and each of which has a 50x payout if it succeeds, and you will do very well -- you'll quintuple your money.
Why? Give me a list of drugs that have zipped through phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 trials in less than a year, which Flucide will have to do if it is to be available in 2 years, given that the first trials are at least a year away.
If you asked that group of investors if they think that NNVC has a better than 50% chance of success I'm pretty sure they'd say no. But they are willing to put a small fraction of their capital into a speculation with no more than a 10% chance of succeeding if "success" means that that $6 million becomes $300 million or more.
Two years to a cure? That sounds wildly optimistic. Here's my best case scenario:
Toxicity testing actually done and completed by the end of 2013.
Manufacturing facility completed *and passing all certifications* by the end of 2014.
Phase 1 trials done by the middle of 2015.
New round of share dilution. Management announces they have enough money to keep going for 2 more years.
Phase 2 trials done by the middle of 2016.
New round of share dilution, hopefully at a better price than 0.45.
Phase 3 trials done by the middle of 2017.
FDA mulls over the data for 6 months. Approval comes at the end of 2017.
A cure for the flu is ready for delivery in 2018.
So, five years to a cure. If all goes swimmingly well.
Seriously, I never see each testing "phase" of any new drug take less than a year, no matter what the drug. It takes a long time to get together a team of doctors, recruit the patients, get the data, analyze the data, get the FDA to sign off on the results, yada, yada. And no, I'm not talking about cancer or heart disease trials where each phase might take years.
The market is often wrong but it is right far more often than amateur speculators are. If NNVC is such a sure thing, why isn't Seaside just holding on to its shares? If NNVC really has better than a 50% chance of success, then you must have found the biggest market anomaly of all time -- congratulations, George Soros will be seeking trading advice from you.
Today NNVC is one series of toxicity tests, one phase 1 trial, one phase 2 trial, one phase 3 trial, and one FDA approval away from having a marketable product. Five years ago NNVC was one series of toxicity tests, one phase 1 trial, one phase 2 trial, one phase 3 trial, and one FDA approval away from having a marketable product. Great progress, that.
NNVC just sold at 0.45. So much for the 0.46 "floor".
"Sorry, but you so mischaracterized the upside of successful flu trials that I had to correct you....regardless of any odds you wish to pin on it. Given the way the drug works, I would put the odds well north of 50%."
I think that's highly optimistic. Certainly if the market shared your views the stock wouldn't be at 0.47, it would be at 5.00 or more. And that market includes a lot of hedge funds and seasoned speculators that have decided that the prudent thing to do with this stock is stay away from it. I figure there's at least a 60% chance NNVC runs out of money before we ever really know whether Flucide or any of their other drug candidates works in humans. And I'd only give Flucide a 50% chance of actually being safe and effective if it ever does get tested in humans -- there are just so many things that can go wrong in those tests. There's a long, long list of drugs that worked beautifully in rats but either didn't work in humans or had excessively dangerous side effects. So my seat of the pants guess for the odds of success is about 20% -- and that's more optimistic that the odds estimated by the market, based on the current price. I've seen way too many promising high tech start ups fail to think that NNVC has a 50% chance of success.
Who is paying for the renovations of that property -- Diwan or NNVC?
Even if Flucide gets FDA approval there's certainly no guarantee that NNVC will be at $100 a share. As I've already stated, there are lots of reasons it might be lower. (For starters, we don't even know how many shares will be in existence then.) After FDA approval I will be delighted to see NNVC at $30.
Yes, they claim that the existing lab can make enough Flucide for toxicity studies. Great. So why wasn't it done last year? Or at least started? That's the problem with NNVC. There's always an excuse for another delay. So maybe toxicity studies will be done before this year is out. I hope so, otherwise I'm out with a loss. But the history of NNVC makes it plain that getting tox studies done this year is far from a sure thing.
2013. If the toxicity studies aren't done by the end of this year, I'm throwing in the towel.
That depends on your definition of "soon". So far as I know toxicity studies haven't started yet. Given the glacial progress of NNVC I don't expect to see the tox studies completed until the end of the year.
I said, purely for sake of example, that after Fluicide approval NNVC would be above $5. Last I checked, $100 is above $5. Unlike you, I don't pretend to be able to predict the precise stock price because there are so many unforeseeable factors ahead. How much stock dilution will there be? What other flu treatments will be available by then? Will spiraling health care costs (Obamacare will only make that worse) cause congress to put draconian price controls on "essential" drugs? (Fluicide will then be labeled an essential drug.)
There is an enormous amount of risk in this stock, but enough potential upside to warrant having a moderate position in it.
You failed to grasp my point entirely. If you really believe that NNVC will be at $100 a share after Fluicide approval then you could rationally hold the stock if you believe it has better than 0.5% chance of succeeding.
Me, I take into account the reality that there will be more rounds of share dilution before those phase 3 trials are completed. (Or equivalently, NNVC gets funding from big pharma in return for giving up a fair fraction of the profits.) So while NNVC might well be far above $5 if all goes well, I certainly wouldn't count on $100.
" If you own stock you must also believe it will pass all required tests."
Another example of innumeracy among amateur speculators. Right now NNVC is under 0.50. I think it is reasonable to believe that if Fluicide is proven to work in humans and gets FDA approval that NNVC will be over 5.00. A 10 bagger. Thus one could rationally hold this stock provided that one believes that there is a better than 10% chance that Fluicide will pass all required tests.
That's right -- you can believe that NNVC is more likely than not to fail and go bankrupt and still have rational reasons to hold this stock. But you wouldn't put a quarter of your savings in it.
I hope you're right. But I'll believe it when I see it.
I'm sure that nearly all (if not, in fact, all) of those 5000 tests are on the same animal - the rat. We still do not know the safety or the efficacy in humans, and determining that part is always vastly more expensive than any number of rat tests.
Five years ago NNVC was one toxicity test, one phase 1 test, one phase 2 test, one phase 3 test, and one FDA approval away from having a salable product. Today NNVC is one toxicity test, one phase 1 test, one phase 2 test, one phase 3 test, and one FDA approval away from having a salable product.
What has happened over the past 5 years is that NNVC has spent a lot more of investor's money.
Hence the low stock price.
"At this time of year NNVC has done it's best and highest price."
I hope you're wrong, because if you're right I dread to think what next October's price will be.
In any case, the end of tax loss season has not caused the rise in price that the optimists promised.