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.
Are you around? Would you care to proof an article for me?
Ghrh has the potential to lengthen the animals life. Both the dogs were young for their age before the cancer hit, so its tough to know if it lengthened their lives. However eliminating the cancer certainly did. Trouble had over 12 tumors, 3 months later there were none. She recently developed what we think is a new tumor, but her heart is in bad shape now, no need to worry with the tumor.
http://web.stagram.com/n/severywhereman
I thought some of you would enjoy seeing my dogs being treated. These are about 6 years old, the dogs were being treated with Ghrh for their cancer. The older dog, trouble was 16 at the time and will be 22 next month.
Angle was the much sicker dog was 14 at the time, and we were not sure she would survive the treatment at all. That is why there are not many pictures of her more extensive treatment. I was just too worried to take them. She died at 17. The large tumor on her was not cured by the treatment, however it was growing 30% a month at this point. The growth was completely stopped, and 2 months later she was strong enough for surgery to remove it. She later died of heart complications, not cancer.
Just another reason I love Inovio and Vgx animal health.
I do not know...
I believe the license is non exclusive, but I would need clarification on that.
I do not think I made my point as well as I could of.
I can use fundamentals to predict what your TA will show. When Inovio's P2 on VGX 3100 comes out, it if is good your TA indicators will show Inovio is a screaming buy. If the data is bad, TA indicators will be as well.
My point is TA only shows two things:
1. What the fundamentals are already showing.
2. Investor/market psychology at the moment.
The main reason it "works" is it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
As a quick glance to gauge the attitude of the market/stock holders, it is ok. If you are investing in a stock based on TA you are in for a world of hurt. If it is a short term trade, you may be ok provided a fundamental change does not reset the technicals.
Tom
I am curious how long you think is common for any biotech to release a product?
Your statement makes it sound like you feel 13 years is a long time. In biotech it is not long at all. Normal time for a product to market is between 10-14 years.
You seem to think that technical trading will dominate the ops for Inovio until a product is released. This is simply not correct. Just like last year, fundamentals will drive the stock price. Last year when flu was running and discussion of Inovio's products picked up the stock started moving. Then the Phase 1 data came out there was more of a run. Then the data about the Roche partnership started leaking out and we saw a huge run in the stock. The public announcement happened after the partnership was already priced in to the stock. Then as is true in all runs, the stock dropped back.
I did not call the top back then, I wish I had of. TA could have helped me in that area, but I had good reason to think there was more fundamental data that could drive the stock higher.
During the process of bringing a drug or drugs to market there are many milestones. The major ones are partnerships and phase trials. These drive the stock price up and down due to the fact that the stock market as a whole prices based on future performance. So positive date is positive for stock price even if there is no product on the market yet. As the odds of that product reaching the market increase or decrease so does the stock price.
Tom
The fallacy of technical analysis is hi lighted by your statement it could take one week or two months to happen... That is in no way helpful. Also TA also does not guarantee it will happen at all so I cannot reasonable sit on the sidelines and wait for it to happen.
We have seen many people come on this board and say exactly the same thing. I believe (but have not checked) we had Miamigent saying something like that in December? The other members of this board have better memories than I and will fill in the data.
When I invested in Inovio not only did I not worry about TA, such a tool was not even available as the company was private at the time. Imagine where I would be had I waited for such a tool. Nowhere is the answer.
Fundamentals are the only real reason to invest in a company. TA can be helpful on your entry and or exit. TA can help you with trading, but no more then momentum and insider buy/selling. I entourage all to learn TA as it can be helpful. But never forget the fundamentals even if you are just trading they can bite you. I have forgotten more then I know about TA as I took a course on it back in 2005 and discovered much to my horror that using TA made me much less money then just using my gut making fundamental based trades. This is not true for everyone, and it never hurts to have another tool.
Tom
I believe pps will have a run in the weeks approaching the data release. I also expect the data to be late. I am thinking august...
I hope i am wrong, but the fda is rarely on time.
I fully expect another nice partnership, and am hoping for 2.
Motly Fool second trial for 3100...
I have done some research on that unblinded trial they mentioned in their article.
There will be such a trial, it is not currently on going. It will prob start in April or May, though I do not have any data on exactly when.
The concept that the insiders can watch this trial and make decisions to buy based on it is false.
Thanks so much for being active here. I really appreciate you science point of view.
Thanks for the reply...
We already have had clinical proof of electroporation in multiple trials, (hiv,leukemia by chrontech) but I think it helps prove it works in people.
Just like I was saying that 3100 success or failure does not make or break the Ino concept, because the synthetic dna is different in the different products. The selection of the synthetic dna is a possible point of failure. A success will prove it can work, a failure that that product does not work. Wall street will see complete doom if it fails though.
Can I steal your 1700 year old technology statement for use in an article?
Pain, I am curious if you consider the Oncosec Phase 2 data as proof of concept for the Inovio pipeline. We were discussing 3100 being a proof of concept, if that is true it seems to me that Oncosec should be as well. The primary difference being direct injection vs systemic delivery.
I just picked up 30,000 more. I am watching to decide if I grab more today...
Wow you had me laughing pretty hard with that response.
I am truly amazed that anyone takes this guy seriously.
If he wanted to be accurate he would have said 30 year old idea....
I just added another 100k at 2.72
Merry Christmas to all the Inovio followers. Wishing all of us another great year!
Yes I think he made your point well. Still I say its a very big deal, but not make or break. It is proof of concept, no doubt.
Me too. I know nothing more then you do on that. I feel the data is way past due.
Sry i have nothing to add.
I cannot argue with most of your points.
I can quibble with a few details, but over all what you say is true, or is what the stock with reflect.
I do not agree that a failure of HPV cervical cancer phase 2 will make the whole Syncon platform a failure. While a success with not guarantee that every syncon vaccine is a success either.
However, wall street will see a success or failure as being the whole platform...
I believe that cancer will have many options for treatment. I do see immunotherapy as becoming the primary way to fight it. Enhancing the immune system I believe will be the first way we fight all illnesses in the future. I expect that Inovio will dominate that area of development for a long time.
Antibiotics are having major issues, but most of the problem is self inflicted by government and society, more then a problem with science coming up with more compounds. There are more antibiotic small molecule drugs undiscovered then have been so far, in many different and novel classes.
It has become too expensive to develop these products. Something you take for acute symptoms is not nearly as profitable as something needed to treat a chronic condition. But both take the same up front development costs. On top of that the litigation issues with drug development also depress the process. These can be easily addressed, we need the political will to do it.
If you take the fact we have been using antibiotics for about 80 years, we could easily use them another few hundred years without running dry.
A better way to fight infection is still desperately needed. I believe that vaccination will be a major tool going forward. Of course I expect Inovio to be dominating this area. Other ideas are phage viruses, which until antibiotics was a leading idea for fighting infection, all the way over to nano bots. All of these areas and more will be used and even the nano bots will be reality in the next 20 to 30 years. There will be other novel concepts that I cannot even imagine brought forward by our very smart people in biotechnology.
I am very worried about the problem, but I feel certain that once the people get a collective will to fix the problem, we will have viable products in 5 to 7 years. I do worry that our stupid politicians could let many thousands of people die before effectively addressing the issue.
Frankly I do not even remember all of the trial numbers, but the first failed trial was for VGX 410 for hiv. Along that path you had a hep c and head and neck cancer product that failed and one more I cannot remember at the moment.
These were all small molecule drugs and the trials took place while VGX was still private. Joseph was running VGX back then and the idea of taking over Inovio was not even a thought.
These failures are the main reason the company pivoted in 2005-6 to Dna based vaccines and therapy, though Joseph told me at many different times he was intending on either starting another company to address that or moving VGX into that field in the future.
You can find some good information of the early history of VGX in my interview with J. Kim
I have a reason for them to go lower, bad trial data.... I personally never forget that. Having been through 4 failed trials with this team, I know the feeling well.
No one here is a bigger Ino bull then I, but I have always been a realist.
I just want everyone to keep that in mind. Data rules and it can come and bite you.
I have no doubt that Joseph would decline a mere 2 to 3 billion deal. Of course it would go to the board, but as the largest shareholder it would be easy for him to enforce his will.
Both he and David want to turn Ino into the next Gilead, and do not want to start over somewhere else.
Mack is right about Oncs carryover to Ino. We will see.....
Well careful who you listen to....
I still am hoping for an entry below 2 between now and the end of the year....
I did not expect it to move up like it has, so I could be wrong. I will be investing my end of the year profits, so I am hoping for a dip.
Roche valued ONE pre clinical (animal studies) vaccine at 400 million Not Inovio. If that is worth 400 million it is easy to say that the HPV/cancer vaccine nearing the end of phase 2 is worth at least 2 times as much. Then you would value all of the Phase 1 trial vaccines at at least 50% more... You can easily compute a value at over 2 billion for the company based on that alone. That does not include the many other pre clinical drugs.....
mmrich1, your post is full of errors and as active as you are here, you should know better.
First, preclinical data is NOT Phase 1 data, it is animal data. Ino announced preclinical data about the vaccine.
Second, you rarely vaccinate only the people that have a virus. For example the current outbreak of Meningitis at Princeton. They have had 7 cases, but they are vaccinating all of the students that live in dorms on campus, and all employees with sickle cell disease. That is at least hundreds of students, most likely thousands. Treating the MERS virus would be much larger numbers, into the tens of millions of people. The doctors on the ground were worried about this outbreak of an unknown virus and the lethality of it. 63 out of 149 known infections have resulted in death. The Spanish Flu back in 1918 only had a 20% lethality rate.
Finally you seem to misunderstand the reason Inovio actually made a virus for this disease. This was a new and emerging disease. Inovio is positioning itself as the go to company for vaccines to battle just this situation. The SynCon system makes developing such a vaccine both fast and very cheap, and the ability to develop such a vaccine in a short time, then show good animal trial results that take place over months clearly demonstrates Inovio’s ability to deliver on what the company is saying SynCon can do. If this virus is deemed to be a much bigger threat, then the company will continue into human trials. But if the disease stays so limited, I do not see that happening unless a partner steps up to underwrite those expenses. That being said, there are many oil rich countries in that region that could do just that if another outbreak happens.
To sum up the reasoning, Inovio wants to demonstrate the ability of SynCon to rapidly react to a new and on going outbreak. This will build both price for share value, and shareholder value.
I agree with you that this release did not warrant the run up the stock had. I certainly disagree with you that the ops should be in $1 land, but I do not mind the high dollar land too much. Given it was just last spring we were all hoping for it to break $1. I personally want it to hold in the $2 range for the rest of the year, but I think the high dollar range may be likely too.
If your beliefs are as mentioned, you should have a short position and be making some decent money on the drops. Good luck with that.
Tom
Good question. I do not spend much time trying to talk up INO. I am not in the business of trying to give hope or appearances that could be misleading so I can try to talk up my own holdings a few cents....
As I stated, I believe the value of the company is better now then at this time last year. Joseph and company have done a good job of managing the craziness and staying on target.
As normal, we were all impatient last spring on HIV data, and last summer on the partnership. From experience, I know that these things take on a life of their own once it leaves the company hands they simply have to wait. I have been involved with the company a while, through 4 failed trials. None of those came in on time either. Usually about 3 months late, and sometimes even worse. I mention this because we are coming up on more phase 2 data that we will all be very impatient for, and will most likely be driven crazy by how late it is. The federal government does not care very much about our feelings or our time frames. Keep that in mind. Also the science itself can often lead to the need for interpretation and consultation back and forth.
I believe the real market price of this stock should be somewhere around $7 now. I base this on the partnership having been announced, 2 pending phase 1 trial starts due before the end of the year, or early next year, and the Roche partnership. I sincerely believe if INO had major media platforms like larger pharma companies, the price would currently be around $7. I personally feel the value of the stock is about $12. The reason I feel the market price and value are different is that even if this company had major media, barring good educated speculation, there are still things about this company that many people do not know, and would not likely learn from the media. I also know the major players, and knowing how they think and approach business, and having experienced how they handled failure, I know very well they will handle success even better then normal. Joseph Kim is the smartest guy in this business bar none. So my value may be higher then some other people would think. I am sure their value is almost as valid as my own. You could say knowing these people can cause me to be blind too.
I believe 2014 will be a MORE epic year then 2013. The question is which direction will that epic price move go? Most of that hangs on the Phase 2 HPV data. If that data is good I see INO going to $10. If it is bad this could go back down to $1. I can only imagine the company is feeling enormous pressure to ink at least one more deal before the data, and try to pad their cash balance sheet. It is what I would do. I personally think the data will be good, but we all face a big risk in the data. Many will have to decide how much if any we will sell before the data as a hedge. Everyone here should be considering their own plan on that now.
Tom
20k is a good number. Few people have that kind of money invested. I have no where near the holding size I should have, but I am doing my best to make up for it and add over time. I think one day that 20 k will have you wealthy at the least, and rich most likely. Good Luck!
I am trying to. I have some big positions in msft, ddm,tiffany, amazon and a few others trying to grab the xbox 1 and holiday bounce. I have rolled some of them already for ok profit. Hopefully I will do well in the next few weeks. Then i hope to pick up another 100-200k p. we will see......
Hey Mort has bought 35,000 more then me this month! No fair!
Helllo everyone. I just wanted to take a few minutes and share some of my thoughts and actions.
I sold large block of shares that I originally bought for short term holding only back around 2.60. That left me with very large holdings.
Since INO went below 2.00 I have bought over 200,000 more shares. It is still a good price.
I want everyone to consider the value of this company vs the value last Dec-Feb. We were sitting in the 40-60 cent range back then. One question to ask is given all of the recent progress, including the price per share increase, is this company a better value now or was it a better value then? Now there are many variables, but my personal belief is the company is a better buy NOW. I am sure all the chart readers will have different opinions and even fundamentalists will. So look it over and make your own choice.
I personally find charts are only useful for short term decisions. Very short term. I have always believed fundamentals are what really matter. I will continue to believe so in the future. If you believe in the technology, and the management, you should be investing here and looking at a 1 year hold time. The next really big decision the we KNOW of for sure is the Phase 2 data coming up in about 7 months. My guess is it will be late as always, so say about 10 months.
I believe we will be looking at another partnership before then, but that is just wild guessing. I do believe we have a big even coming up in the next 3 months, but again that is less wild guessing.
Stay strong, and never let love of a company prevent profit taking if you get a great run.
Tom
Hffington post has a story about hpv vaccine not covering strains most common in african americans. Just another good reason for inovios....
I have added 100,000 new shares in 2 50 k blocks below $2. One a week ago roughly and one a few min ago. I am totally pumped for that opportunity. I have more cash on the side in case it goes lower....
Easy, few people should own biotech stocks. This should not have been your first stock purchase.
I understand your concern and indeed I have been very surprised and disappointed in the price action since the announcement. If you can hold this for 12 more months, and you have a decent buy in price, you will do quite well.
I do not know the milestone structure, but it is a good guess that starting P1 will be one, and they are starting P1 by the end of the year. That should result in some sort of payment.
So it should turn in to a steady stream of money. My thought is this will cover all INO operations for the next 5 years (it could go longer, but I doubt it). Of course missing a milestone will cause problems. Also the company could grow fast enough to consume that money, but that is also another good sign.
nope. I changed them both at the same time several months ago....
Do you really think 75% is optimistic? I thought I was low balling it.
Almost every time I get a flu shot I get sick. If a vaccine was out that could not make me sick, I would gladly pay extra. If the vaccine protected me for a few years so I didn't have to get a shot next year, I would pay even more! My question is how will you get people to buy the old vaccines?
Yes my spelling is awful, and gets worse when I am tired. I normally have two others proofread stuff before I submit something. Getting SA to publish this article has been ongoing for weeks. I quickly added the partnership data and reshaped the article. I had a lot of notes to the editors in it too. I had no idea they would remove them and work some of them into the article. I fully expected it to come back to me today and I would have time to have someone proof it for me. OOPS.
I have been on ST a while, longer then I have been here any way...
Thanks Bill. It was a bit rambling I thought. I had to tack on a lot of negative junk so it would pass SA muster and I never got a real chance to proof it. I do think it contains a lot of information the general public did not know. Of course people here know it.
I do not know. That article had no balance. My original article did go over risk, just not enough for them. They also wanted discussion of the balance sheet which is why I added that chart and the stuff after it, which was really not necessary. I had discussed the companies funding and linked to the 10q so people could easily see the data.
Shorting a stock is much more risky then being long, yet no mention in his article of any risk at all. On top of that, J. Kim had mentioned several times that major partnership any day now, yet that was not mentioned in his article as a potential problem. Very strange indeed.
Yes it is hard to believe. I had to rewrite my article many times and it took almost two weeks of bank and forth to get it published. I finally added in stuff on the new partnership and then added a bunch of junk to be more negative (balanced) and boom it got published. I had notes in the submission, and I expected to get a chance to proofread. At least the general public got a chance to see the history, and hopefully that will educate them about all of the past dilution and other bs prior to 2009.