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.
Really think so? I mean, Ok the MC is well over 100M, but that might be for the combination of IMO slightly better finances and the trial which seems to be finally coming to an end.
If the 6-9 months timeframe is from June as you say, would you agree that it's either late or that you are wrong?
If the 2-4 months timeframe is from submission as yoy say, would you agree that it's either late (unless it was submitted in Nov and will be published in the coming days) or that you are wrong (again)?
If it was submitted during the fall, which we could assume October, that would be wrong, again. Two months would be December, four months would be February. Unless you have seen anywhere the publication, it is rational to agree that the timeframe of 6 to 9 months starts from submission time.
As for the info available on the message board, it was submitted during the fall (maybe October?) and the process usually takes 6-9 months. So at best I would say April, which is a little less than 2 weeks ahead.
By the way, many pumpers in this message board will insist that the 6-9 months timeframe starts when the authors did start to write. They have all be proven wrong by facts since quite long time.
Could someone please elaborate on the actual balance sheet?
Do you know when that debt is due?
IMO, the current share price is so low and outta whack that the market has already priced it as if there are a billion or even two billion shares outstanding.
Finally!
Couldn't find it, do you have a link?
No I believe it has nothing to do at all with the coming publication.
What does your answer have to do with the investment decision to buy Sawston, to which ex was refering?
I do not believe it has anything to do with it itself, however it was interesting to note how much the focus is switching toward DC Vaccines.
Quite sick of this publication that is supposed to be publish noone knows when.
Based on which assumptions?
It's time to publish the publication and unblind the trial for good.
Anticipate what? I am stuck with the anticipation of interim blinded data.
I think we got the answer to this question at the ASM when Linda said they were doing a blinded sweep of data (however she put it) every spring since 2015 and would do one again this spring, and she indicated a chance of ending the trial after this spring refresh.
Patients were living longer. Have we heard that before?
ASCO designation for a great immunotherapy trial result, as Flipper share with us the other day
I take that to mean that they didn’t get it 100% correct, but it was close enough
I bet you are kidding, aren't you?
Unless they release some material information , I don’t see any reason to discuss or argue
That would be way too early, 100 days since initial submission would be too quick IMO.
Right, I mistyped, around 3 months and a 1/2 (even better).
It's a view. Fall could even be earlier than that. If the publication will go to that journal than I might agree that it should be out soon.
You might also want to take a look at this article:
https://academic.oup.com/neuro-oncology/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/neuonc/noy032/4917531?redirectedFrom=fulltext
As for the dates, you say:
And on the article dates; was the receipt date, the date of the final draft, or the first article submission. It could have been initially submitted several months before Nov.
We don't know.
Two things to note:
1) stat doesn't seem very optimistic when it talks about how many completed p3 trials had positive results;
2) article was received on November the 29th 2017 and published on March the 6th 2018 (4 and a 1/2 months later).
Then they very cleverly supported our findings by quoting two people, in Dr. Bosch’s last presentation, who had publicly revealed what they got as trial results when they used the tools the company gave them.
they continue to carry out the trial blinded for just a while longer.
Lol, 'then sell and move away' has been a phrase often used not to discuss things in this message board. Glad to see it's still around, lol.
IMO it's quite obvious that if a R/S happens and/or the number of shares is increased that the share price will drop. Just take a look at ARGS to gather a simple example. Let's hope that there is some news before, but, personally, I lost optimism.
The problem is that even if a few warrant holders would want to convert and cash their warrants, since the volume is so low, IMO the stock price would plummet even on modest sales if there won't be reasons for a buying pressure in the meanwhile. Sure enough, many people believe that some news might be released before share increase, but that is only a hope, nothing certain at all.
Besides it, I still keep on asking one easy question that I wish someone would finally answer. In the 22nd of September 2017 8K
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1072379/000114420417049289/v475690_8k.htm
The release states: "While anticipating the disclosure of interim blinded data"
That was almost 6 months ago! Why ancitipating something that in the next around 6 months isn't going to happen? If they wanted to release that data in a publication and by September I believe it was more or less clear when the publication would have been submited and how long it would have taken, why anticipating such a thing 6 months ahead?
You keep on repeating the same mantra month by month.
Interesting conclusion.
IMO it's quite obvious that this time the dataset will be ready for ASCO where, I do believe, they will unblind the trial and show results.
IMO it will hit 0.35 within tomorrow.
Yes it does, and it also applies to private equity firms.
Technically it seems to me that the price will be heading to 0.5 in a short time.
Rk is best message board poster. Period.
I believe the stock could break 0.35 this week.
If you take into consideration this PR:
https://www.nwbio.com/dcvax-clinical-program-updates-presented-dr-marnix-bosch-boston-scientific-conference/
The idea that I got out of it is that the publication at that time was not submitted yet, thus at that time, I do believe the possible outcome of the acceptance was not known. However I do believe it will be accepted.
First off, I see you are not very optimistic.
While I do believe that you scenario could well happen, I would think this is not the case. I mean, I doubt that 64 contributors would sign a paper only to realize later on that it could not be accepted. I believe they know how things work.
As for Direct, I was more specifically referring to pag 27 of the ASCO 2017 presentation, where it is stated that a publication was in preparation with the investigators. Any clue on that?
AVII77 what is your estimate for the publication for L to be released? Also, do you really believe a publication for Direct will ever be released?