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.
Hope, maybe what you term as "noise against PPHM" is actually opinions that (while different than yours) reference very valid concerns and criticisms of the current situation.
I try to consider most opinions and tend to ignore those from either extreme that totally refuse to acknowledge that there are both good things and BAD about PPHM.
Agreed, Ex.
Not only comical but has absolutely nothing to do with PPHM.
So what does that have to do with PPHM?
I fail to see any connection.
Can you explain?
He's right Hope. You even admitted reads have no correlation to price a few weeks back.
Honestly, if you want to make a real stretch one could argue that reads here equate to price degradation.
Go back and chart reads over time and then lay it over PPS in the same period.
Seems the more reads, the worse we do!
Let it go.
Good move Loof on your sell and repurchase.
I didn't have the C. A. Jones to do that, though I did consider it.
If they had any big news to save their Bacon it would have happened today Hope, and (once again) it did not.
Maybe all those negative posts you reference account for all of our board reads. Ever think about that as a possibility?
No fear. Posts of massive orders from a bogus website will LAUNCH us to huge price appreciation.
Buy NOW while there is still time to reap MASSIVE profits!
Remember, you heard it here from ME first!
Realist, that was kinda my point.....
Yes, and it is taxable income, which means they bump up the bonus enough to get what they want PLUS enough to cover the tax liability.
Funny how they talk about reducing expenses but it never occurs to them to reduce the expenses incurred by the bonuses.
They're not even smart enough to realize the damage that they are doing to themselves and the Company by continuing to run the ATM.
It's like a self fulfilling prophecy.
My belief is that it is due to sellers who bought on Friday (or before) and are taking profits before the impact of the earnings release slated for later today.
I want to believe so bad that this time it will be different.
I hope you are right Wook.
Earnings Whispers today:
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Inc. $0.40
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals Inc. (PPHM) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:05 PM ET on Monday, December 12, 2016. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.03 per share on revenue of $17.99 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.03) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 67% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for revenue of at least $20.00 million. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 57.14% with revenue increasing by 88.97%. Short interest has decreased by 52.9% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.6% from its open following the earnings release to be 39.9% below its 200 day moving average of $0.67. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. The stock has averaged a 5.0% move on earnings in recent quarters.
Way overdue Chey!
Sub-Penny again!
It was only a matter of time.
TDA shows last trade at .0095.
Maybe Joe Biden is your missing puzzle piece?
"Which maintains its status at "Imminent."
Which has been its status for 3+ years.
Cancer Treatments Offer Promise, But Also Risks
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/03/health/immunotherapy-cancer.html?_r=0
Amen!
What is it that you think has been said about the BOD's here that is not true?
1. Performed miserably for years - True.
2. Take excessive salaries/bonus's - True.
3. Act in their own interests with no regard to shareholders - True.
4. Failed to negotiate a partnership/monetary deal (when the time was right) despite saying a couple of years ago it was imminent - True.
5. Allowed the Company to devalue so much that we are facing an imminent (there's that pesky word again) Reverse Split - True.
I'm sure there are many others but I'll leave it at that.
Promoted here AND the SEC filings. I'm sure someone manipulated the filings to insert the RS split verbiage even though it will never happen!
Those nasty, anti PPHM people reading all our postings, most likely.
The thought has crossed my mind but I'm keeping my fingers crossed and hope that SK was giving us the true low-down vs. the rosy pictures painted before that never "came to fruition.
I keep thinking (and hoping) that the BOD's realize the gravity of the current situation and take appropriate action to right the ship.
Time will tell.
True, but the point was that it could not be submitted because it failed.
Had it been submitted, it would have been rejected as a failed trial.
Strictly semantics.
PPHM can call it anything they want.
The FDA called it a failed trial, and since they write the rules I'm accepting their decision over PPHM's.
No CP, I am not confused at all. As I said, Bavi is the primary reason of many that I am still holding a position. I still believe it has a chance.
Funny that the last sentence of your rebuttal quotes me (and confirms) the whole point of my post; the Phase III trial failed. No glowing analysis of the results can possibly change that.
A trial either passes or fails. There is no grey area in between.
Did we pass? FDA says no, and that's the one who really matters at the end of the day.
Au Contraire my Friend, I have no intention of diverting attention from Bavi, it is just the opposite, however when patently false statements about the failed trial(s) are stated as fact I feel compelled to respond.
Jake, I agree 100%. All the talk of past failures has no bearing on our future. Also, as you said, if Bavi has a place in our future then it will find it.
As I've stated before, I believe it does have a place in cancer treatment and the market. That is the biggest reason I still hold a substantial position here.
What causes me to respond sometimes is frustration with glowing pictures and grandiose statements about how it's not PPHM's fault due to a multitude of nefarious reasons and how the P3 trial did not fail when by definition, it clearly did fail.
The P3 trial failed.
There is no spinning that can change that for those that want to do the effort to understand the details.
It's water under the bridge in regard to our future.
Like Rev said, it's time to move on.
No Bio, not fraudulent information relating to the dispute. By the time the settlement is reached anything relating to the claim is irrelevant.
No, I'm speaking from past experience. The settlement is generally sealed as well, as it contains all of the dirty details of the settlement.
They generally word the releases to include any entity that has even the most remote connection to the parties (i.e. The Company, its employees, consultants, heirs, successors, dependents, etc.) and include indemnification, which means that if an outside party did have a claim it would be valid only against PPHM and no one else, as PPHM has guaranteed a full release of liability. I think once the settlement is executed and funds disbursed, it is extremely difficult to re-open that can unless it is discovered that one of the parties provided fraudulent information.
Bungler could answer better but they are generally pretty air tight.
Ex, in my experience, it is very common in settled lawsuits to seal the records and include non disclosure by all parties as a stipulation of the settlement agreement (as well as a total release of liability by all parties and prohibition of future legal action).
Perhaps one of our resident attorneys can comment further.
Well, the Judge that heard the case didn't call it sabotage, so despite what you may believe, I will stick with my belief that it was never proven.
Furthermore, the FDA doesn't believe it either or they would pursue it and then MAYBE it would make headlines IF IT WAS PROVEN.
Thanks Ex, for stating that clearly.
You expressed my beliefs on both points more accurately than I was able to.
EB, you're entirely missing the point. I will mention sabotage, but I do not ACKNOWLEDGE SABOTAGE.
You said:
"Why do people think that if you say it enough times people will believe you even when it is so obviously not true??"
That's kind of how I feel about the repeated posts about sabotage. It has never been proven. Just because it is repeatedly claimed here in posts does not make it true.
Bio, I don't "fail to mention sabotage each and every time.".
I have mentioned sabotage in many of my prior posts in saying that it is more of an excuse here than the reason the trial failed. Good grief, they were awarded concessions to expedite a P3 trial that subsequently failed!
Further to the point, my post that you responding to addressed lack of partnerships, the possible reasons why, and that I don't think we have the info to determine the answer.
"obviously, Peregrine has resiste (sic) any offers up to this point and so it looks to be on Peregrines terms because it is taking too damn long.".
Bio that IS NOT obvious to any neutral viewer evaluating Peregrines history and prior failures. The reason that the lack of partnership has not occurred is hidden from us. You may believe they rejected partnerships because they were not on their terms. I believe it is likely no one has been willing to sink that kind of money into PPHM due to their lack of progress and credibility.
Implying that one (or multiple) serious partnership offers were rejected based only on SK's words is, IMO, building a house on an extremely shaky foundation.
NoMo, I agree with you that Avid seems to have been, and continues to be, a positive factor in seeing PPHM potentially succeed. That is ONE thing that I pat the BOD's on the back for.