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.
This is getting old. Monthly chart looks like it could very well be ATM. Management has not released any new updates since June. Either we have it or we don't. The waiting is tiring.
ouch! I thought last week's hammer was Lytle paying for the Australia trip. Maybe today they are realizing the budget was low for this show. I only say ATM because, really, what more do we have to explain the large volume sell off other than shorts pushing PPHM down? And, if that is the case, why do it at $1.37???
Yeah, it's funny how the community service officers are out in full force to keep excitement to a minimum about a down under symposium by Peregrine. Some of the contracts must have been renewed because there was a lull for a while. They'll never learn to keep quiet because management gives us plenty of opportunity to beat ourselves up without the CSOs help.
It's always down at this time Sunday.
Geo, you are basically talking about collaboration with a BP. If Sydney is paired with news of bavi and a BP collaboration, what does it do to share price? Is collaboration enough validation to bring PPHM to true value?
I tend to think of collaboration being less valuable to PPHM than partnership. But having given it more thought, if Peregrine announces multi-collaborations it should validate and maintain bavi's "global" branding. This would be a very good thing in my opinion.
They should just release it now to give folks time to digest it. And, since the market happens to be open...
It sure would be nice to know the motivating factor for the shorts to cover on Oct 2nd. What was the urgency? Did a hedged Russell institution catch wind of a partnership or buyout in the works?
We can add October 2, 2013 to the list of unanswered questions with this stock.
Despite the midday drop CMF on the chart spiked up today. Yes, we have something brewing.
June 27. Last substantial PPHM PR. I bought some back today because we are overdue for news. Highly overdue. Would like to see something from down under next week.
Geo, we don't even know if a partnership is still in the mix. "Collaboration" is what King has shifted towards. Garnick doesn't want to partner. Collaboration does little for shareholders.
Going concern: no one knows why the going concern was removed other than guesses like PL being pressured to attract more institutional investors.
New hiring: no clear answers as to why they are hiring. Been told we should be able to figure it out.
We get nebulous PRs from the company. On the outside it looks as though one PR was released to give "someone" an opportunity to buy low (recall that large bid sitting at ~$1.18 for weeks and it finally gets hit after the June PR before Russell rebalance).
Share price is $1.40. We know it is manipulated but it is not supported by the company. Lytle uses the ATM at $1.47 to get rid of going concern.
Shouldn't we know the answers to some of these questions 6 months after NSCLC Phase III approval? Unless King has something up his sleeve, he needs to step down and let someone who can manage the company take over.
cc to Tradero: my perspective from the past two cc's. Why talk collaboration when the goal is partnership? Why emphasize collaboration? My last post of the day so I cannot respond until tomorrow.
So it was a catch-22 essentially? In order for Peregrine to attract institutional investors they needed to remove the going concern. However, the only way the company could remove the going concern was to dilute shareholders?
Imapseud, you had me going about the two explanations. When I read your first one I immediately thought that management does not know the value of what they have - and really doesn't care either. So I am glad you qualified it in your last paragraph.
Until something different is done, the market cap will stay below $250M. The most we can hope for is King has been told to play down the company en lieu of the CA.
One question still unresolved is why the removal of the going concern? Was that even asked at ASM?
You don't go from $1.40 and roughly $200mm in MC to astronomical value of $100 billion overnight. So, IMO the slow climb north begins in Australia.
Frustrated, I cannot argue that. In my previous post I noted the shift from "partnership" to "collaboration" and, frankly, am bothered by the company doing so. Either Peregrine is very close to a partnership or acquisition and are trying to keep it discrete or they are truly moving towards "collaboration." Also noted months ago was how King tended to emphasize the pre-clinical trials and de-emphasize the Phase III trial. This, again, could be for the same reasons: either partnership is near or Peregrine is in buyout talks.
In my experience investing in companies, I have been lucky enough to have two stocks acquired by another entity. In both circumstances, the CEO/BOD somehow gained additional shares of stocks that were immediately vested. This seems to be a common theme in acquisitions of public companies. The directors get additional shares and shortly afterwards the company is bought out. Most shareholders go away content with increase PPS.
The shift from "partnership" to "collaboration" is more evident in King's last two presentations. Coupled with the sideline conversations some ASM attendees had with Garnick about preferring to NOT partner one has to think Peregrine is more intent to collaborate than partner. What does that mean as an investor?
In my view, collaboration is less likely to increase PPS in the short term. Collaboration does not necessarily prompt the company to release a PR. It does not guarantee a payment to Peregrine. Nor does it bring the immediate recognition or confirmation from the investor community PPHM so desperately needs.
What do other people feel about this shift in company speak?
Why would the CA prevent management from saying anything related to the CSM mess up? Wouldn't that, in effect, prevent management from releasing/saying anything until there is resolution with the new CA? And if there is another CA for yesterday's announced actions would it delay it further?
I am not asking rhetorically and not specifically of Eyebuystocks, I truly want to understand what reasoning could exist. The urgency to "get to the finish line first" seems to be halted due to CAs. It makes it simple for competitors to gain an edge too easily.
CLFD moving in the right direction. Maybe my $18 price target is too low considering it surpassed $17 today. The company appears to be in a solid move north. Credit to Beranek for getting Clearfield going on all cylinders!
King needs to step aside and allow someone with business acumen run the company. Yesterday's performance was a clear indication of his ineptitude. He is not clear and concise in his communication. He is not clear and concise in his vision of the company. He lacks any sort of urgency and leadership. And worst off, he has NO skin in the game.
This board ridicules IR for the dysfunctional PRs. It's not IR. It comes from the top. King continues to miss opportunities to sustain confidence in shareholders. Instead, we get the shaft in options. What has been done to deserve the options????
Yesterday there were a number of posters confused about his comments regarding partnership. How many people went back to the 5 minute mark of the presentation and listened over and over again trying to interpret what he said? Ridiculous! When the presentation transitioned to Dr. Brekken it was a relief. Someone who could actually bring energy to the conference!
It is also quite evident King lacks business savvy. Put him back in the lab and get someone who can lead, keep on target, and actually produce credible results.
I sold all my in-the-black shares at $1.41 yesterday amidst the "partnering by year end" confusion. After hearing about the company's philosophy about BTD I am glad I did. No expectations out of Australia. The stock is going to get pounded back to $1.30 or even less...and sadly, the company doesn't care.
King made two comments that should cause question to every shareholder in PPHM. He first has shifted from "partnership" talks to "collaboration." This is difficult to interpret. Is it a good thing or does it say they cannot partner so they will collaborate?
Second, he is already planting the seed for partnership in 2014 instead of this year. Very disheartening.
In addition, he gave no details. No urgency. Nothing.
His upbeat mood must have been from the options package.
Edit>
Bidrite: This was my last post of the day so I hope you get this. Yes, you are correct in your later post. After re-listening, I too heard the "partner before end of year" comment. It was pertaining to bavi. Disregard my frustration above. King is such a poor speaker he cannot highlight any key points. Ugh...
First they were late by 20 minutes. Then they cut it short without any closing comments????? What the heck is wrong with this management? Brekken's part was the only breath of confidence in the webcast. Absolutely ridiculous.
IR, you had better address this! Unbelievable!!!
King sticks it to us this morning with more options (vested albeit) and then he sticks it to us this afternoon. Outrageous.
And there goes the stock price...
Anyone guess how quickly a new CA will come out??
I am in the hotel now. King is on his smart phone. I gingerly passed by and he had eTrade up. I think he's selling his already vested options before the call. The delay is because his order needs to fill. Oh, this is not good....
I still think there will be nothing today. It's all set up for October 28th. We'll see. Good luck!
Why sell ATM at this low price if you have two BTD in hand?
Yes, if Peregrine is using this conference to gain access to potential partners then we've got a problem. I do believe the "party" is to celebrate BTD in the U.S. and gain further attention outside the U.S.
If that is truly a belief than the stock should be sold and bought back at a lower pps later after all the dilution to fund the go alone strategy. Unless of course one believes they could raise money some other way.
Let's say Peregrine has a BTD for NSCLC. Wouldn't Sydney be the place to unveil it? Sure, spend $100k on a ballroom to make a splash at the premier conference associated with Lung Cancer. When they received the conditional BTD, Peregine management looked at the calendar and said, end of October is IALSC in Sydney. They had ample time to fulfill all FDA criteria so the BTD is legitimate. Going concern is removed, new hiring in manufacturing/supply chain is filled, plans for PH III trial are solidified, etc. Now they release PR two weeks in advance saying they are attending the conference. I bet they release BTD PR the morning of the conference. Even the name of the project "SUNRISE" hints of Sydney. Australia is near the International dateline. They see the sunrise before the U.S. Everything is ramping up to the conference.
No partner needed. What does the stock price do?
Toolong, the conference is specific to LUNG CANCER. What additional data would you expect Peregrine to release? They won't release Liver or Breast data at the conference. If data is used at this conference, I think Peregrine should use the data before the CSM errors were realized.
The company clearly wants to proceed into Phase III with NSCLC on it's own. This PR reinforces it to me. There may be partnership in other areas (liver, breast, pancreatic, etc) but I think they are going it alone in Phase III NSCLC. It's frustrating only if you have a short timeline in mind. Otherwise, it could be management looking to maximize shareholder value. I do wish they would just be outright about it instead of playing these games.
Getting past $1.55 would signal something to me. Shareprice seems to stall there. The volume and price action on October 2nd is still a mystery. But I have to believe it was some of the shorts covering. Also, Thursday's 280k volume and uptick also was suspicious. Smart shorts exiting? Or, was it someone who knows something?
My cautious side asks what is it that could be presented at ASM?
Format errors. I hope iHub is aware of it. Might have to switch to (gulp) another board...
Cloaked, it may be worthwhile to add the date of the CA appeal date in November. I have a feeling Peregrine is staying tight-lipped because of it. That may open up the communication line.
Up on 290k volume. Down on 10k. I like the odds on that and have a feeling we're not done for the day. The puzzle pieces are starting to come together.
Well, that was fun while it lasted. A little excitement on a down-market day.
We have just over one week to hear more from Peregrine. It would be great to have a PR before the ASM.
For those attending the meeting next week is it possible to bring a list of questions from this board? If given an opportunity, ask management specifics. Here are a couple that we need concrete answers to:
1. Why the hiring? Specifically. No coy answers like, "it should be obvious." Remember, we pay the bills...
2. Has bavi been given any form of accelerated status?
3. Is there more than one BP interested in partnering?
4. What aspect of partnering is being pursued? Oncology? Immuno? Both? Entire bavi platform?
A buyout is best case situation. It alleviates having to decide an exit strategy. However, I have seen bad buyouts (or I should say buyouts that are not shareholder friendly) in the past. There is a tendancy for a stockholder to think valuation is different than what the company sells out for.
I wonder if SK can counter-sue any of the plaintiffs in the CA for defamation? A half-decent detective would be able to link persons with logons. Wouldn't that add another layer of amusement in this novel?
Bidrite, it might be how I interpret the ex-US partner comment, but I believe a partnership is open to any BP. The terms Peregrine is looking for gives the BP partial rights outside the US. However, Peregrine maintains all US rights. Correct me if I am wrong. This doesn't mean we need to be in Sydney necessarily. But Sydney is in the Pacific rim region is it not?
Stone, agreed. There is a high possibility of the run up this month. Dia has repeatedly recommended we look at THLD as an example of what we may expect out of PPHM. Looking at the three months prior to the PR of their partnership the THLD chart is nearly identical with the last three months of PPHM. According to the chart October is the month! Add the ASM and Sydney event into month and the probability increases. Larry, Moe and Curly have quieted their attack on the company. Makes me think the intended damage is done.
Removal of the going concern tells me this time is different and it's time they move forward. We may not know by ASM but we should know why they are making a big splash end of month in Sydney.
Seemed to me the stock was bookended all day. Over a million shares traded hands today with only a 2 cent swing in price after 10:00 AM. I had an order in at $1.47 at that time and it never took. I suspect shorts were covering... again. Good timing for it since it is the 4th of October. Shorts in this window do not get reported for a while. Keep covering, we wouldn't want you to get nipped in the arse when PPHM really takes off.
Per Cheynew's post # 143593:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 25, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as this motion may be heard, defendants Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
Steven W. King, Paul J. Lytle, Joseph S. Shan, and Robert L. Garnick will and
hereby do move the Court, pursuant to Rules 8, 9 and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 15
U.S.C. § 78u, et seq. (“PSLRA”), for an order dismissing plaintiff’s First Amended
Complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff’s Section 10(b) claim should be
dismissed because he has failed to plead facts with the requisite particularity, has
failed to comply with the heightened pleading requirements of Rule 9 and the
PSLRA, and has failed to circumvent the PSLRA’s safe harbor provision. Further,
plaintiff’s Section 20(a) claim fails because that claim is predicated on plaintiff’s
deficient Section 10(b) claim.
This Motion is based on this Notice of Motion and Motion, the
accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the previously filed
Declaration of Meghan O’Ryan Spieker (Dkt. 27-3) and attached exhibits (Dkt.
Nos. 27-4 & 27-5), all records and papers on file in this action, and any evidence or
oral argument offered at any hearing on this Motion. This Motion is made
following the conference of counsel pursuant to Local Rule 7-3 which took place on
September 26, 2013.
Dated: October 3, 2013 COOLEY LLP
Thanks BCS. Just to clarify, this is the final verdict once it comes in, correct? No more appeals? I assume it is possible for a judge to decide prior to the November date?
Not having the defendants negotiate a settlement out of court after an appeal is a good signal. I do hope once this is finalized we can all get on with our business...
Charts for ACLS are looking highly positive for a continued push upwards. I like the wins the company is getting. And I look forward to seeing some positive earnings shortly. This is not going to spike, however, I can see it continuing an upward curve to $3 in upcoming weeks.