So by that logic LP ought to enjoy the same access, but nepotism is an unearned club to play in.

Everyone? 🤔

MartyDg - You must have inside knowledge to be so definitive. Please share.

Manibio - But LP didn't have a sugar daddy Gov't pampering him either. Respectfully, I think you have a very naive concept of what it takes to accomplish what NWBO has. The most ardent critics here have never launched a small biotech.

Cofer Black would have known if the MHRA had not intended to approve.

Tax payer subsidies I classify as public money.

You don't know the first thing about Elon musk, other than what you're told.

It took years to realize that outsized gain, which would have benefited only those investors who were able, and patient to hold. The stock was known to be shorted, and I'm sure investors, knowing electric cars were still an unknown for widespread adaption likely chose to get out. You're right, Tesla didn't trade on the OTC. Tesla had tutes and huge Gov't funds pampering him. He didn't have 50,000 retail with small average investments holding up the stock. Tesla SP rose despite bleeding cash. BTW - Elon leads the tale of two lives. You see the carefully crafted for the public persona. He comes from a very high ranking Order based on his bloodline. He was groomed from earlier childhood for future roles he was expected to fullfil. It's no surprise that the GOV'T put him as the face of its satellite distribution goals. I'll leave it there.

manibio - I would contest the word excuse, and replace it with unrealistic expectations, if one believes anything is predictable when pioneering, especially, especially in the most regulated industry. It took Tesla, what, nearly a couple of decades to launch his first car. It took years before the stock skyrocketed, while the company was bleeding in debt. The market looked at preorders and deposits, and took a leap of faith on the potential of sustainable revenue, not profits in hand. He wasn't hamstrung by anything close to the external interference faced by, especially a small biotech. The Gov't put Musk in business.

Also important to keep in mind, how long new regulatory guidance took to establish RWE as viable, and or even preferable, from an ethical perspective for severe disease trials, which helps the recruiting efforts to enroll trial participants. Also keep in mind, that it was the regulators who required the crossover.
- These external interventions are fundamentally responsible for adding more years than longs originally expected.
- It took an equal amount of time for Bosch et al to evolve and mature processes and methods to ensure viability.
- All these efforts on the formulation end took all this time to secure critically important IPs. The last thing they need is to face infringement by would-be copycats and drawn out legal cases.
- Keep in mind that Flashworks was acquired, I believe some time near DL. It wasn't NWBO management, but rather the folks at Flashworks, who worked independently to modify and evolve Eden all this time. Until recently, Flaskworks was still tweaking a couple of newer prototypes, and hadn't finalized the commercial version yet, but were very close. LP has been dead on accurate, when she describes multiple fronts working in parallel.
-Add the brutally inept inefficient bureaucracies, RA's, and counter parties, which have large rolls to play.
Lastly, there have been supply chain issues, which haven't completely resolved, and that brings you to where we are today. Imo, one can argue in no less time than it should have taken.
So we can talk about Jama taking long or the MAA application, but that narrow minded view ignores the total sum of all the parts working in tandem. Anyone can tease out what they want to make misleading statements, but give some people credit for critical thing.

dstock - Like with anything that's disruptively revolutionary the journey is likely to be a rollercoaster, not tidy and neat, and predictable, if not downright ugly, until it's not. That's when you know you've arrived.

It depends. Discussions aren't formal offers 😉

A company like Merck needn't be gunshy about forking over big bucks to engage NWBO in a partnership. I suspect the anticipated high cost of stacking treatment modalities such as Keytruda+DCVAX would have come up in discussions BTW parties, and potential pricing models for reimbursement. Let's assume that Merck negotiates earning a percentage of DCVAX sales when combined with Keytruda. Merck has an opportunity to double dip. So part of the negotiations, I would imagine would have focused on getting the closed loop Flaskworks units approved, and ready to scale. It could explain why we haven't heard an announcement of a finalized partnership, because things are still dynamic at this juncture, yet not for much longer.

Got to love those six digit trades, after all, it makes so much sense. I heard an opinion somewhere, that if LP stood in the middle of Wall Street with a loudspeaker, rehashing all the milestones and other formerly released information through public filings, that presto, MM's will miraculously release the company from its rigged algorithms, and better yet, buy her lunch and take her shopping.

ae kusterer - We know what the stakes are in the legal case. If we didn't have a predominantly captured and controlled legal system, we wouldn't find ourselves on "pins and needles," as we wait to see what the Judge decides. So we wait.

Gary - interesting. Didn't know Brokerage Houses did that with an equity on a bonified exchange.

Gary - Well said. I have to feel very strongly in my gut, when I choose to make a large commitment. We can call it emotion, euphoria, or just a great story, that motivates people to buy-in. If the story is well told, and all the boxes checked at the right time, FOMO, combined with wanting to buy-in when prices appear undervalued as it rises, we could be looking at something really unexpected. Plus, with the MTD news, if positive, add an up-list with trailing PR's, like you said, anything is possible.

GLTU

TTsr - GREAT STUFF BY DANISH! It's these kinds of watershed milestones, which has me disagreeing with Gary's notion, that we will need to see commercial revenue spike, before we see the larger moves in the SP to levels $15 ..$20 etc. This one patent alone is an enormous added value which the market is currently clueless about. The question that's often asked, and not sufficiently answered is, "why doesn't the company PR these kinds of milestones? I have a hunch, and if you think about it, it seems rational. I believe it was LP during the ASM before last, where she said, that there's going to be a time, when the company releases multiple PRs in succession, strategically timed...
I'm reminded of how Management accrued multiple achievements to release to shareholders during the last ASM. Take that a step further, and you have lots of potential newsworthy, high value achievements, which continue to aggregate. Plus, we know that an up-listing requires strategic timing. With all that said, I can see the company going full throttle with PRs soon after, or simultaneously with the MHRA approval. It's a catalyst based investment. So having many un-reported, or minimally referenced achievements released to larger audiences will provide tremendous momentum than on an approval announcement alone. IMHO.

Nope, that's not an appropriate litmus test, because while there are innumerable targets to treat, there's nothing at the terminal level, especially since Stupp's dubious 2005 protocol. You have to consider the potential threat to the competition etc..

Unfortunately, no amount of punishment can reverse the irreversible. If I walked around knowing I was connected to the "all body of things, 24/7, especially without my informed consent, I would go postal."

Like the same compassion that your NHS showed, when it mandated DNR orders for hospitalized COVID-19 patients, without getting informed consent from their families first? All part of the confidential internal communications of course. Those are the people you're holding up as your shining people's advocates? Get the F* outta here.

DL - I wouldn't expect the HR Department to hold out empathy, as a mission critical trait in their hires. However, I would suggest "controllable" is very high on the list.

ae kusteter - I don't see the @charles Payne link you referred to?

I think the Judge has known which way he intends to rule. If that's the case, I see no justification for eating up the calendar year, while we've grown to expect everything to take longer than reasonable.

This is a legitimate concern, and it comes in two parts. From a public perception viewpoint, that kind of operation could afford the criminals cover by pointing to a natural disaster. As for how things work in the real world, it's absolutely astonishing how much data, at every level one could conceive is always being stored in huge data centers all around the world. Over land, under the sea, deep underground bases. So in short, there's no such thing as lost data. It all depends on who you ask for the key, and who has the power to ask for it.

🙏🙏😊

CapHillGuy - Thank you! This information is very helpful. I had resigned myself to believe Schwab didn't offer that level of detail, and I wasn't happy about it. 👍🙏

It certainly adds a huge boost of confidence. She's become larger than life at this point in her career. Laura is in her prime, and I'll go so far as to say, that her persona carries weight in the courtroom, all the way to the Judges chambers.

Not if we have uninvested posters lying 24/7, literally, supposedly looking out for investors, because they have nothing else going on in their pathetic lives. God bless the guy for bearing the cross for those, who in many cases share the same sentiment, except KIPK chose to express them. Style is a subjective thing. Sorry, Krass is one thing, but deception veiled as constructive is your idea of a joke perhaps. People have their hard earned money invested here. You don't know the difference?

Not for nothing, let me tell you something, bravo to NWBO management for hiring Laura Posner, and even better on contingency. Hiring the right talent to optimize potential outcomes in your favor is a talent, and should be recognized as such.

$NWBO @CohenMilstein Congratulations to Laura Posner on being named a finalist for Attorney of the Year! pic.twitter.com/5ZNJ8OLi3N

— Andrew Caravello, DO (@andrewcaravello) July 17, 2024

Punishment should be across the board or none at all. I recognize lying, deception, and ill will in general, which can be very infuriating for most. I choose to add to my ignore list. I enjoy seeing a cleaned up board to scan through. Ignore is always there as an option. But without that feature, I see no difference between word salad FUD and hate. It's one six half dozen of the other.

No more biotech for me after this one. If, by some higher power, honest, transparent trading is instituted, with strong guardrails and accountability, then I'd say maybe.

A warning advising KIPK of what he will, not may face, if he continues with the same antics would have lessoned the outrage.

I was suspended for one week for sharing Hoff's legal analysis from X. X doesn't allow cut and pasting content. For legal analysis of NWBO'S case, Hoff is it. I thought this board was for investment DD? But suspension for one year is beyond comprehension.

Manibio - I would agree, that NWBO doesn't. My statement was purely observational.

97% of my long biotech watchlist is red.

Gary - That's interesting to say the least. What could those numbers be that the doctor would consider more important than getting your LDL super low🤔 LDL is directly associated with plaque increase. As for Vascepa (icosapent Ethyl), here's a snapshot of the outcomes in plaque volume in an 18 month study vs. placebo. The trial was called EVAPORATE:
grafting
Other salient features/characteristics:

Family history of coronary artery disease: 32%
Hispanic: 54%
Diabetes mellitus: 69%
Prior smoking: 43%
Principal Findings:
The primary outcome, change in low attenuation plaque volume, for icosapent ethyl vs. placebo, was -0.3 vs. 0.9 mm3 (p = 0.006).

Secondary outcomes for icosapent ethyl vs. placebo:

Change in total plaque volume: -9% vs. 11% (p = 0.002)
Change in total noncalcified plaque: -19% vs. 9% (p = 0.0005)
Change in fibrofatty plaque: -34% vs. 32% (p = 0.0002)
Change in triglycerides: -89.3 vs. -92.1 mg/dl (p = 0.91)
Interpretation:
The results of this trial indicate that icosapent ethyl 4 g/day reduces low attenuation plaque volume compared with placebo at 18 months, as measured by cardiac CTA. In addition, there was a reduction in total plaque volume and other plaque parameters as well. In the setting of a small sample size, there was no difference in triglyceride levels. These results may help explain the cardiovascular benefit noted with icosapent ethyl in the REDUCE-IT trial.

Yikes, it doesn't sound fun. Interesting, I'll check out.

Gary - Continued: Interesting to note: My brother has a total Cholesterol of 100 naturally. I asked him a few months ago, if he was taking Vascepa? He said, no because, "how much lower should he be?," you do need Cholesterol. It came up again recently, and now it turns out, that he started taking Vascepa and a Statin. 🤔 So I asked him why, and I forget the exact number he referenced, but according to his never ending interest to remain current, and his perfectionist nature, he said, you can arrest arteriosclerosis, and even reverse plaque buildup when you get the numbers down to? So I suspect that his LDL was above 50, and he wanted it at sub 50. Vascepa has shown to decrease soft plaque, as much 70%, if I recall that specific study, which was conducted to measure changes in placque compared to placebo. When I find it, I'll share it.