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.
800k+ on the bid right now. Someone wants in in a big way.
Definitely very typical, it's just more in-your-face and polarized here than on some boards. There are good people here too, however, which is why I stick around despite the excessive noise.
I agree, actually thought it was pretty positive overall. I still think some impatient retail will shake out over the next few days, might wait a bit to add to my position. The funding portion was huge - even if it's not ideal funding, it's a known quantity. Nothing could kill my enthusiasm for a company faster than not knowing where it's going to get it's next dollar from... and having a ~$0.05 share price or lower. Rest of 2017 should be plenty of time to execute on irons they have in the fire.
Not surprising, rockman. So many of the posters on this board are so full of it that they can't keep straight whether or not they're supposed to be bullish or bearish. It's really pretty obnoxious. Not responding to you so much as adding to your point, by the way.
All that matters is data. The PR changed nothing, aside from giving a little transparency and being smarter about giving dates for finishing pre-clinicals. That's what they should have done the first go round. Pre-revenue biotechs get diluted. If anyone didn't know that and isn't ready for that, I'd take this as a public service announcement and get out ASAP. Does that mean SP will go down indefinitely? No, but if you want them to continue trials to hopefully make money at some point, they will be diluting your holdings along the way. If and when they provide good data, the price will go up... but they'll still be diluting you until they either start making money to fund themselves or they sell the company/technology. This isn't rocket science.
So again... data. You think it's going to be good? I'd buy this stock, or have a plan to buy at a price you like. To be honest, if you think the technology is any good and you're waiting for a better price... you're kind of nuts and playing a bit of roulette. I don't count opportunistically adding to an existing position, that's a little different. If you don't think the technology is going to work, you should sell and get out of here. Or short it, I guess, which is probably what dinogreeves, and most others who can't figure out whether they're in love with the stock or can't stand it, are doing now. I won't even address those that routinely mention that they'll be buying in the .01's next week, without providing any rationale as to why that might occur.
And for the love of all that is holy, stop saying "last chance at .05's!", "last chance at 4's!", "need to slap that ask!", "going on a mega run, probably next week!". The cheerleading here is as bad as the shorts.
I'm going to go have a beer or three now and enjoy a long weekend. Hope you all do the same!
My memory is that the all-in annual cost to a patient (gross, regardless of insurance, discounts, etc) was expected to be considerably lower than current SOC HAART treatments. Don't quote me - can't remember where I'm getting that factoid from and I don't have time to look at the moment.
However, if true, it would suggest that it's likely "relatively" inexpensive to manufacture. Which is not the same as cheap, for what that's worth.
I'll agree with you here on one point, and only one point. Mono is the truly disruptive indication in a big picture view. However, your corollary point about adjunct enrollment is nonsensical.
BH covered everything else quite sufficiently.
Interesting, got the same question in my email from Bored Lawyer this morning. It's something I'd consider carefully, based on a number of things. Short list?
- Who buys it
- What the rest of their portfolio/pipeline looks like
- What the economy is doing
- When it’s bought; i.e. how close it is to market
Definitely interested in hearing how others would consider this.
I asked the same question of a trusted source, Bored Lawyer. Apparently it wouldn't likely face too many ethical or legal challenges, as it's a fairly common scenario overall. Most states have well-defined rules for recusals of "interested directors", but that doesn't mean that they can't bring the idea and de facto broker a deal.
Based on this, I'm ignoring the idea of it facing legal or ethical challenges for now. More interested in how it would fit for VRX and whether or not they could afford it.
Speaking of competitors who may be interested in making a move, does anyone think that there's anything interesting about Paulson being put on the VRX board a week or so ago? Clearly VRX doesn't have cash right now, but perhaps they could roll the dice and finance a purchase. Seems he stands to look like a hero on both sides of the transaction if VRX buys it for a decent multiple and then it becomes a blockbuster.
There's certainly truth to that. There's also truth to the idea of a buyout taking all risk and uncertainty for investors off of the table, and hopefully providing a very nice return as well. Couldn't fault anyone for wanting to see one path or the other. I'll be around til the end either way.
Interesting, appreciate the response. Glad to hear that someone else was seeing it the same way that I was!
That would be a big up front cost to just shelve a drug with huge potential, both medically and economically.
I trust your information here because you've proven correct in the past. I'm curious though as to why GILD would rather see it go away than take it on as part of their portfolio? Going back to my earlier post, I can't see why a BP wouldn't want to take a risk on this for the right price. I mean, if there was literally an option for it to go away, fine... but that's not the case here. Someone else will play ball, and it'll likely be detrimental to GILD's market share/revenue in the HIV space. Seems the smartest thing to do for GILD would be to recognize that the development costs of their latest HAART cocktails are a sunk cost to some degree, and make the needed move to protect their HIV franchise going forward. They'd then have the best of both worlds in HIV - latest HAART and next gen treatment. All of the bases covered. Not that it matters, but any thoughts on why they'd rather sit than play ball when the price of admission is the lowest it'll likely ever be?
Again, purely out of curiosity and for my own edification. Any thoughts appreciated.
Have to say that I kind of agree, Grip. I've tried to play out in my head how this thing stays independent of a BP much past good combo results, and I just can't put it together. Completely speculation on my part, but if I'm a BP exec, the math seems to add up here on taking the risk on it long before it hits the market. This is a big, disruptive drug in a big, expensive industry with several players. And importantly (for investors only, clearly), it's not a cure. It's not Harvoni, where you actually cure Hep C and basically wipe out an entire stream of income after an initial burst of blockbuster sales. This is effective, next gen treatment of a prevalent, lifelong disease with a $20B+ market in the US alone. There's no financial reason to sit on this science and hope it goes away, and all the incentive in the world to make sure that your company is the only one who can sell it for the next 16 years or whatever is left on the patent life.
I'm willing to wait as long as it takes, even if that means CYDY taking it to market themselves. I just don't see that happening, unless the management team has an asking price that's just really through the roof. Like, ten zero's or something.
Again and to be clear, this is all pure speculation on my part, and maybe not even what I consider to be most likely. It just wouldn't shock me a bit if they PR'd combo results and a buyout the same day.
Completely correct, buckysherm. But I could care less if they complete enrollment this week or sometime next month. Or even August. Because...
"Among 9 participants who completed 24 weeks of PRO 140 plus an optimized regimen, all had a target-not-detectable reading on their viral load assay."
That's all that matters. The drug works. All of these patients were failing HAART in multiple drug classes, and now they have no detectable viral load.
THIS. IS. THE. ONLY. THING. THAT. MATTERS.
I almost hope that they don't finish enrollment on time so that some folks get scared and dump shares. I'd like to pick up a few more in the .60's right about now. Get your popcorn, boys and girls. We're about to have some fun.
Much appreciated, BH.
Most of us here love information and due diligence. It just has to, you know, be rooted in facts. Or at least logic.
If anyone is interested in actual, verified Paulson-related news, BoredLawyer just shared something interesting with me.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/19/hedge-fund-manager-john-paulson-joins-valeants-board-after-his-firm-took-a-nearly-2-billion-hit-on-valeant.html
Regardless of who it is, I suppose I'm a stickler for pointing out BS. Call me old fashioned...
There are a few on this board with Paulson connections from previous raises. I'm sure that someone could verify or debunk this with a phone call.
Your username, post count, and the timing of this revelation from an anonymous source all smack of an agenda, however.
Agreed... also been out of that completely for a bit now. Disappointing, because investments aside, I believe the development of a breathalyzer for THC is extremely important. I'm just not sure I see it coming from that company anymore.
Agreed. I've all but cut bait to go fishing elsewhere. Kept a few shares as a lotto ticket and that's about it. Good luck to folks here, hope it works out well.
Well, you knew that would pay off sometime, right? I'm still waiting to figure out how my perfect score on the physics SAT II will benefit me in the real world. Let me know the next time someone needs to calculate a vector...
Nice work on that, and sorry for the mistaken credit earlier.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe there was a footnote saying that they didn't have data for two patients. That would mean they had 25 at the start of June. Definitely backs Saltz's info earlier, and makes 30 before the end of this month very feasible in my eyes.
To the OP on this thread (maybe trding?), nice work on the math.
My pleasure, and your confusion there is understandable. The wording from the abstract is one of two things:
1) confusingly worded, or;
2 VERY leading
Based on the fact that they hope to enroll the trial fully by the end of June, need several weeks post-full enrollment to have endpoint data together, and presented to ASM on 6/6 (I believe...), I'm going to go with "it was confusingly worded." Looking forward to seeing what they presented either way, as I expect positive news. And it would be even more positive if, in fact, the statement you quoted was accurate and therefore VERY leading.
Exactly. Nothing matters but news. Everything else is just noise. I don't think anyone is here to make a penny or two per share... I'm just going to sit over here with my popcorn and wait.
Thanks for the affirmation, misiu - always nice to hear from an actual doctor, since I'm certainly not one of those!
I seem to recall a recent post where someone mentioned that ASM was actually going to be selling materials from the conference. If true, there may be a conflict on CYDY releasing them publicly in a certain time frame. Pure conjecture - anyone remember that post and have more information?
finesand, just to be clear, a few points about the information that you can expect to see when they release the presentation:
- 8 patients is a months old figure, probably as old as late February based on when the abstracts were due for ASM. Most here expect that number to be significantly closer to 30. The company has a track record of only PR'ing the first and last patient injected in a trial.
- Do not expect to see actual primary endpoint data unless the trial has fully enrolled (30 patients), has completed the first (one week) arm, and had a week or two to get data together. The primary endpoint comes from a double-blind study (PRO 140 vs. placebo, one-week time frame), which means that the company doesn't even have access to primary endpoint data until all 30 patients have finished the first week. They literally cannot present primary endpoint data on an incomplete trial.
- You may see up-to-date data for the second arm of the trial, which is a 24-week open label arm where all patients receive PRO 140 for 24 weeks. Since this is not blinded, in theory they could present data on whether the endpoint for that arm of the trial is met. For the record, back in April, 7 of those 8 patients who had completed the study were on rollover treatment with PRO 140. You can assume that it was working for them, or they wouldn't keep taking it...
More info and all the specifics at clinicaltrials.gov. Just search for CYDY and it's easy to find the trials. Hope this is helpful. You're right, by the way - legitimate critical thoughts and opinions are useful. Unfortunately, may of the critics here (I won't name names...) are patently, demonstrably incorrect with their assertions or speculations, which makes it hard to keep up consistent meaningful conversation. Legitimate questions and concerns are always welcome in my book.
Not that I enjoy waiting, but the lack of news isn't exactly shocking. Couple of weeks left in 2Q. I'll get nervous this time next month with no news. Time to enjoy the nice weather and have a few cold ones, think about anything other than this ticker for a bit!
I think you're probably right, Grip. Seeing the same dynamic in several other tickers at the moment as well. Those with conviction are already in for what they want to be in for, those who are less sure have sold, and the population at large is either in the dark or waiting for results. Zero volume days would barely surprise me as we get this close to expected milestones. Money is on the table and we're all just waiting for the river card...
Kinda wish I was actually busy at work so I'd have something to take my mind off of the waiting!
All, my apologies for summoning the candyman...
Glad to see there are no new arguments though, just the same demonstrably wrong fluff. Have a drink, Pearsby. Enjoy the fact that you supposedly own at least a few shares of something that will likely be worth a lot more shortly.
Doesn't matter a bit though. All that green and red is just ink... whatever. This will move for real on trial info or a buyout, and a few retail sellers here and there don't/won't matter at all. Not like there are massive institutions trading this right now on the technicals.
Of course, everyone likes seeing green instead of red in their own account. I get that.
This forum becomes a snoozer quickly when even Pearsby thinks it's too dangerous to short and quits playing games. Have a good weekend all.
He suggested that someone in management at a pharmaceutical company had informed him or her privately (since it's clearly not been released publicly) that they were looking at buying another company for a specified share price. You're correct that he or she likely would actually have to act on that information to actually be committing a crime, and I admit that I'm assuming they're trading on it if they actually have information.
Either way, this board has enough repetitive posts. Doesn't need anyone else joining in the fray.
I doubt anyone is seriously watching... I've seen the admins intervene on one board, but it took things getting personal for weeks there before anyone stepped in.
I don't mind the spam in the sense that it's quite easy to see it for what it is, it just makes me spend more time reading to find anything worthwhile.
Hope so for my sake. Hope not for yours, since I think the SEC would find your posts troubling.
If you actually know something, just buy quietly and quit spamming the board with evidence for your insider trading trial.
Ah, I thought I was too but it appears that I was mistaken. Thanks for pointing that out, I'll be on the lookout for ASM materials as well.
I think chump posted it earlier, maybe yesterday. A quick review didn't show much new to me, although cliff's notes of the audio provided by trding (I believe, sorry if I'm misallocating credit) noted that Pourhassan responded quite confidently to a direct question about enrollment that the combo trial was on track to be fully enrolled by the end of June. While I would have preferred updated numbers, I'm hopeful that it's clear to the management team that they shouldn't respond that confidently about a deadline that's only three weeks away if they don't intend to hit that deadline.
That was the big takeaway for me, but I haven't listened to the audio.
Appreciate the article either way, always nice to read relevant news and analysis.
My immediate reaction is that this is a narrow, short-sighted analysis that only focuses on status quo treatments and doesn't allow for anything disruptive. Be it PRO 140 (which I think it will be...) or something else in the next few years, I think it's more likely that these predictions are laughable in the long run because they ignore any potential for innovation.
And if I were forced to put money on it, I'm betting that GSK/GLD both know perfectly well that if they stick to the script, someone is going to drink their milkshake.
But hey, I'm just some guy. We'll all see how it plays out, I suppose.
Yeah, I think the last cheap seats to this show are about to get sold out. Thanks for the updates fellas.