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.
According to the report you posted from marketwatch,com they reported a "meaningful improvement" in a "key secondary endpoint" but say nothing about the promary endpoint which I assume must have failed. That might explain it. It should be easy to check the results for this primary endpoint and see if my assumption is correct.
And on the other hand, a physician who is confidant and knows what he is doing, can save many lives by using something (DCVAX-L) he believes works and saves his patients. A side benefit of courses, is that his reputation grows as a doctor who does very well by his patients, while his colleagues continue to administer SOC or chemo or radiation, to the relative detriment of their patients and their quality of life.
I am not saying this will happen. I am just giving you the possible theory by which it could happen. I personally think they will use this PIII trial to enable several much smaller and shorter trials in several selected solid cancers, selected with the input of the RAs to obtain approvals for all solid cancers in a very accelerated manner.
Once this is approved for GBM, and it is seen as very effective and viewed as a platform for all solid cancers, their will be much demand for off label use and great demand for compassionate use. This will build immense pressure on the RAs from thousands of cancer patients to get this approved for their solid cancers as well and quickly given the great safety record of the treatment. Cancer patients do not have the luxury of time!
That all solid cancers talk without trials is just absurd.
But that is not true of the attendees at ASCO. They get it.
I also imagine that commensurate with the gain in revenue for the drugstores, there will probably also be a larger loss in revenue for the oncologists doing the chemo and radiology which will not make them happy, besides the very large loss in revenue for the biopharmas selling the chemo in the treatment of cancer. This could truly be revolutionary for the entire industry and they better be planning for this.
it is weird that they did not get the date right in the file name!
NWBT_ASCO_slides_06032022_FINAL.pdf -- that should have been 23.
Actually in the case of NWBO, the share price reflects what it is manipulated to be!
I hope they archive it as I will not be able to watch it live.
So if the market for the shares is currently say $1/share but unbeknown to the market, the co will announce great news that will probably take the SP much higher (perhaps $2, perhaps $3, perhaps $5, perhaps $10, perhaps $20, - if at all, witness NWBO (good news but no or little market response and take your pick of the many SP predictions). How do you argue for some debated new value, which is in the eye of the beholder as the market does know about the news yet?
Well what about the case I posted earlier wherein he is not enriching himself but some friend or even a stranger:
Why then, on the eve of a big deal that will add multiples to a stock's value, can not the ceo of the firm sign an NDA with his best friend, and sell him a large bundle of newly minted shares and make him very rich. He is not gaining unfairly against any particular shareholder, but it still seems unfair to all the current shareholders as a class who are being denied the same opportunity to cash in or being unfairly diluted.
I also thought that was the case. However one thing still bothers me about this understanding. Why then, on the eve of a big deal that will add multiples to a stock's value, can not the ceo of the firm sign an NDA with his best friend, and sell him a large bundle of newly minted shares and make him very rich. He is not gaining unfairly against any particular shareholder, but it still seems unfair to all the current shareholders as a class who are being denied the same opportunity to cash in or being unfairly diluted.
May 31, 2023
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Raymond Michael Sarola on behalf of Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc...(Sarola, Raymond) (Entered: 05/31/2023)
"I am a lawyer specializing in False Claims Act and other whistleblower actions.... "
I agree, I hope you are right on this point. For me, the sooner, the better.
Medical devices? Perhaps think Eden!
It won't be too long. I am confident that we get UK approval by yearend. That means that we should have a submitted MAA by sometime in September or sooner (hopefully on some sort of accelerated basis) which seems to coincide well with the time for the talk by LL in Sept.
I think it is amazing, that but for flippers many ads, there has been very little discussion of the likely contents of MB's upcoming ASCO talk on June 3 and how, if at all, it will affect share price and will (or will not) have new info of significance. It seems that most have written it off as just another ASCO, and refuse to be drawn in by the theater hour talk. Is this "fool me once shame on you, but fool me 4 or 5 times, shame on me."
Notwithstanding, I feel confident that we will have MHRA commercial approval before year end and a commensurate significant increase in share price.
Why pick (limit to) $2, why not ask about $5, $10, $20 or $40 for these time frames?
Keep in mind that "the Court" and "the Clerk of the Court" are not the same and do not carry the same weight. I am hoping that the the Clerk was right and will be backed up by the Judge (the Court) but we won't know for sure until the Court responds.
Give me a break with all this wild speculation, all that was, was someone with blonde hair from the back. No way to know who that was given that view.
Give me a break with all this wild speculation, all that was, was someone with blonde hair from the back. No way to know who that was given that view.
Upon further thought, maybe NWBO should submit a plan to the gov (they seem to be begging for people to submit their ideas) to underwrite a series of CONCURRENT trials in the numerous solid tumors that Direct and L can handle to prove out the entire platform that is just beginning with GBM. This could save multiple lives and shave many years of waiting on a long series of trials after GBM is approved. (unless of course they are currently applying for all solid cancers based on the current PIII in GBM on an agnostic to tissue theory).
you missed nothing worthwhile. Just another example of tax dollars accomplishing nothing, A pity. What a waste of time, and worse yet, a waste of what could have been a real opportunity.
Will this replacement of Exhibit 1 be a further cause of delay in this spoofing case, or can they remain with the current court schedule?
That occurred to me as well.
While you are right, the cost of iclc after the patent expires will not be terribly high, but thejr lost opportunity costs of not owning Oncovir and being able to control iclc by extending its patent will be a significant bargaining chip and worth alot to NWBO. The whole (merged DCVAX and iclc) is much greater than the sum of its parts.
Skit, I do not think what the owners of Oncovir are looking for is guaranteed continued employment. that is small potatoes. They will want a cut of the pie, and a seat at the table when Oncovir is taken over by BP (now) or by NWBO (later) to merge the DCVAX platform with iclc and thus also extend the patent that is near expiration.
My point was not for BP to buy Oncovir for itself, but to use it as an entree to make a deal with LP and NWBO for something they (NWBO) may need more than just a large checkbook. This would be chips on the table which they can use to make a good deal with NWBO.
Meirluc, it seems out posts passed each other in the night.
I might voice a possible concern. As this thread seems to assume that Oncovir on its own is going nowhere with the patent due to expire shortly, but would be worth alot in the hands of NWBO as part of the dcvax platform. It seems to me that with LP seemingly demanding a top dollar from BP (whichever one) the thing to do for a BP is to acquire Oncovir at a multiple of its current value, but this would still be a dirt cheap entree to NWBO for a necessary ingredient for DCVAX. Right now would the time to do this as the BP could easily outbid NWBO in its bid for Oncovir at this time - this may not be true further down the road..
Was anyone present for the presentation? Can you provide a summary of what was said? Thanx.
But all that means, is that when all you have is only about $740,000 we Canadians are already Millionaires.
I think that for the patient perspective, this is great promise for turning these cancers into manageable diseases as you pile on treatment upon treatment and successfully increase the OS. However from an investor perspective, this could prove unsustainable. So if for example each treatment added to the mix demands something like $250,000 for its part of the treatment, which seems now to be the going rate for many of these treatment, when you pile on say for such treatments in a combo, you now get to an unsustainable increase in the treatment cost per patient. The only way to keep the per patient cost "reasonable" is to cut the individual take for each of the component treatments that are part of the combo. Thus each individual treatment will have to accept say $75,000 to $100,000 to limit the total cost per patient to limit the total cost of the combo rather than the say $250,000 that DCVAX is now expected to get. Any thoughts?
You usually do not have to opt-in in a class action. If you meet the qualifications of the "class" then you are automatically in, unless you opt-out.
Thanks, food for thought....
Sojo and Judge,
If we provided ChatGPT access or a copy of all the outstanding TA theory texts published to date and access to market data, do you think ChatGPT would be able to make reliable short term predictions on a regular basis? Would it be a version of tomorrow's financials, today? Could it predict NWBO's short term share prices in advance? I could sure use a crystal ball like that.
I think we have two revolutions in the making.
1) Cancer - Go NWBO!
2) AI - ChatGPT for President!
Ask a patient if he would rather have a subdermal injection or drill a (small) hole in your head to administer the drug, which they would prefer (assuming they both work equally well).
Unless I missed it, (I was trying to do two things at the same time) LL did not highlight the 50% + early success in the combo trial with ICLC. I wonder why? Is it too early to draw solid conclusions? But at least a mention that this is showing early promise should have been warranted. Is she that conservative? I guess when she finally does speak about it, people will notice.
I was under a similar understanding from a communication of several months ago.