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.
I can't say that. We will have to see what happens after the Hold is lifted or we get more clarity on it. Since the Hold started, volume has dried up and ADXS has largely followed the moves in the Bio indexes.
But unfortunately, the only thing I have real faith in when it comes to Wall St is their insatiable greed, so it's follow the money.
The shorts covered 5M shares in 60 days in Feb / Mar. That seems like it might have been a crescendo event? It's possible they press it more, or it's possible the entities that shorted this from the mid-$20s down to $2 are looking for a rinse, wash, repeat scenario. Namely they flip and go long until they get a better opportunity to go short again at much higher levels (maybe $8 to $10ish?).
So I'm not saying it has ended completely, it's just that since the hold there has been no real discernable pattern other than the fact that volume has dried up.
Dawson,
Yes, I still believe in the science. I know the company is pre-revenue. I also know for a fact that ADXS stock was under a coordinated short attack, prominently using HFT from August 2015 thru March of this year. I also know we have documented evidence over the years that organized crime and hedge funds with a similar moral code to Bernie Madoff target and attack micro Biotech companies.
However, there has been plenty of questionable actions from this BOD, DOC, and Lombardo to give one pause and question at the very least competence, whether or not they are delivering on their fiduciary responsibilities, or possibly worse. IMO at least.
You are kinda all over the map here. Unfortunately we have no power to do anything regardless of whom we call or whom we talk to.
Even with the price destruction of the PPS, Sidransky and the rest of the BOD received about 10M-11M Yes votes vs 5M-6M Withhold votes.
So the question is who actually supports them since every long (institutional or retail) has suffered massive losses that only accelerated with the BOD's decision to replace DOC with Lombardo?
This BOD allowed the company to burn thru $200M dollars, gave away 4+% of the company to a CEO they suddenly fired in haste with no real contingency plan in place, and was forced to do an offering for 10M shares at $2. What BOD gets away with that and maintains confidence of professional institutions? Where was the demand for replacement of current BOD members?
The only beneficiaries of ADXS PPS have been those short it to the tune of millions of shares. They made a fortune on their shorts. And somehow they seemed to know exactly, almost perfectly, how long to remain short and it seemed like they were prepared for almost every move the company made in advance.
I could see how any entity that was short would totally support the current BOD.
As far as Noelle, I don't know her and have no desire to pile on. I appreciated her willingness to engage with retail investors and I believe she was earnest in her efforts to do so. However she repeatedly demonstrated she seemed to have no clue what was actually happening and multiple times she made comments that later proved to be either partly or wholly incorrect. I should add the caveat in fairness to her that my opinion is based on what she "supposedly" told retail investors like yourself who shared comments of discussions here.
Tin, this is the real mystery to me as well. 10M shares in an offering that was (supposedly) oversubscribed. Yet it triggered no filings and no announcements or claims of ownership?
This silence on ownership is a significant departure from the way ADXS has handled past offerings and placements. So why the lack of transparency this time?
But lo and behold, we did see a massive decrease in the short position from approx. 8.3M to 3.5M from the 2/15 report to the 4/13 report, or about 5M shares covered.
Was this just circumstantial because of the price collapse? Or was it the fulfillment of the extortion plan you suggested was in process during the summer of 2017?
With the sad 10 year track record of this BOD and their various CEO's it's hard for me to know whether it just incompetence or complicity when it comes to the games that get played with ADXS PPS. Because ADXS appears to be a play toy for a certain consortium of hedge funds.
No real arguments on that, but remember it was the BOD that decided to remove DOC suddenly with no real transition plan whatsoever and then leave the company in Lombardo's hands for almost 10 months. Lombardo was really just a proxy for the BOD.
Good points. I would also add in fairness to Berlin, or even DOC for that matter, experiencing failure is sometimes the best teacher. I know that some of the greatest lessons I've learned in life were things I originally failed at and I used those experiences to avoid those mistakes again.
I never expected the BOD of ADXS to ever attract any real talent, but waiting a year for just more retreads is disappointing. But again I expected to be disappointed by almost any hire. The company has no money and the BOD had already screwed the pooch by giving away almost 5% of their company to the former CEO and his failed strategy.
Most legit BODs would pay a heavy price for that kind of failure. Not this one. So I am guessing this BOD is probably not viewed as very competent or qualified by most in the investment communities.
The unfortunate reality is that this BOD has basically been Typhoid Mary to this company. I don't know why Dr. Yvonne Patterson agreed to license her technology to such an unqualified group of people (as evidenced by their decisions over the last 10+ years)...but we are where we are I guess.
Hovacre, your points are well taken (by me at least) on many factors in Biotech in general or at ADXS.
But just for the record as it relates to what is "baseless" we do have some evidence in the past that ADXS Management and BOD may have been self dealing in frontloading options and RSUs to themselves (lawsuit was brought against them for that) and that DOC did in fact seem to cut a backroom deal on an offering in 2013 to get the votes he needed to pass an extremely generous (many would argue overly generous) compensation package before he accomplished anything.
So appearances from the outside looking in, this BOD and DOC do appear to possibly have had at least some questionable ethical decisions or even may have used cut throat tactics to get what they wanted. And they all have had a long enough history of dealing with low end hedge funds and financiers to no longer be able to use the "naïve" defense as to who they were getting in bed with and what might be required of them in return.
Scott, I wish I had answers to the questions you raise, but I only have more questions myself than ever.
Unfortunately my opinion is increasingly leaning towards the possibility that ADXS BOD and management is overwhelmed and overmatched by events and circumstances and they probably don't have the human talent and certainly don't have the financial resources needed to navigate these very challenging times...at least in relation to the benefit of shareholders like us.
The only person I have any real faith in inside ADXS is Petit, and maybe the science is what will save the company in the end...and our investment.
I don't know why DOC was suddenly and abruptly terminated. But I think that when the BOD did it, almost everyone inside ADXS was taken by surprise, including DOC himself.
It does seem from some subtle clues that have leaked out since that maybe the BOD and DOC did not like each other very much. For exactly what reasons there was bad blood would invite yet more speculation on our part.
Frankly, for whatever criticisms of DOC exist...legit or otherwise...I think the ADXS BOD has a far worse track record going back over a decade. The ADXS BOD doesn't seem capable of identifying or attracting high quality CEO or CMO candidates, or providing any competent or meaningful oversight after they do hire their CEO du jour.
Lombardo was hired by DOC, and previously worked for DOC. It seems incredibly doubtful either DOC or Lombardo expected Lombardo to be in the position he is in now. You don't just suddenly fire your CEO at one of the most critical inflection points in your company's entire history and replace them with a 70 year old "interim" CEO.
For whatever reason the BOD decided to suddenly and rapidly terminate DOC last summer, it appears they decided Lombardo was really just the best available from an internal pool of zero real CEO candidates.
The optics from those moves were bad then and they are bad now.
I agree. While the situation definitely appears to be odd, there is no conclusive proof (as of yet) that those 5 people are gone from anywhere beyond the changing of a PowerPoint deck. I think it's a huge leap to assume that their departure is some kind of foregone conclusion.
Also, from my personal experience with multiple M&A events, a company would NEVER eliminate 65% of it's Senior Management staff BEFORE an actual M&A announcement. NEVER. You would never do anything like that unless the paperwork is signed and legally it's a done deal.
Clovis Oncology (CLVS) also got good news over the weekend...
I nominate GBROWN or EQUAL for the role of Optimus Prime.
It might be good that he didn't.
Based on the Transformers angle, that conversation may have went something like this...
Good point.
Although, I did hear ADXS has been providing support to the Decepticons who are massing forces on the dark side of the moon waiting to launch their next an all out assault on Earth. Supposedly the now empty "manufacturing facility" they built was actually for Megatron to hold Decepticon staff meetings planning the attack.
Just off the top of my head some reasons could be...
- Vacation schedules and prioritization of what gets dealt with either being short staffed or coming back from Easter break and having to catch up on 700 emails / voicemails.
- Nobody answering outside calls and just letting them go to VM (I frequently don't answer outside calls, it is usually salesmen from financial companies trying to peddle retirement planning or vendors looking for an in, or these days it could even be hackers digging for info)
- Noelle and IR got pissed off at retail investors because of some of the pretty harsh things said about her and / or ADXS management (fair or not fair) on this board.
- The sensitive HR nature of personnel / employment questions about specific individuals, especially senior management. It's usually an automatic no comment at best.
- ADXS management has been completely taken off guard by events like deer caught in the headlights. They are completely overwhelmed and overmatched by events and have went into full blown circle the wagons mode to try and wait out the next 3-6 months. After which they hope clinical results or getting closer to the EU decision will result in better offers for partnership or purchase.
- There is some big partnership or sale in the works and everybody has been instructed to go into lockdown mode...even if they haven't been given specific details they have been told to zip it for now.
There could be other reasons, but those are just some I can think of. Although as time goes by some of those potential reasons could logically be disqualified. It's still a little early yet.
Maple, I never commented on any timeline to hear from Noelle or anyone else inside ADXS. That must have been someone else.
Personally I have no idea why ADXS seems to have went underground and appears to not be answering any questions whatsoever. There could be any number of reasons for that. It's definitely odd, but I hesitate to draw any significant inferences from it just yet.
For me the even bigger mystery is the 10M offering that resulted in 0 filings and that ADXS now refuses to provide any details on in relation to the subscribers.
I have no clue. Your guess is as good as mine in relation to this.
As I have said before, I am not really sure how a supposedly "oversubscribed" offering of 10M shares resulted in 0 filings. When you do the math that would mean numerous (and completely separate) entities participated.
Okay, for argument's sake let's say I believe that for a minute.
What makes this a bridge too far for me is that ADXS has been totally silent and refuses to disclose who participated. Why? ADXS has disclosed the participants in EVERY other offering they have done since the uplist to Nasdaq.
Except maybe the one in 2013 that DOC used to get the votes he needed to award himself a huge compensation package.
But why the secrecy about this last offering? Are you telling me an offering...with supposedly so many different participants...is an event they don't want to publicize? That should be a good thing in theory.
It's just odd all the way around. And it raises suspicions for me. The problem I just don't know whether to suspect something positive or negative or neutral.
Well I respectfully disagree with your post. Thoroughly. I have no idea how you get to your conclusion.
It seems clear DOC was terminated, with the mutual agreement that he could save face by resigning in return for keeping all his loot in return for a NDA. Simple as that.
What happened to DOC and why is still open to speculation and debate, but whether or not it involved a deal has never been clear.
If we are all "screwed" as you say then so are the shares of Amgen and Adage, and whoever the mystery entity or entities that just bought 10M shares. These entities are all privy to information we do not have access to. For some reason they have remained fully invested...at least to date.
Unfortunately I now (mostly) agree. Viewed from the benefit of hindsight, I'm not sure there is any other conclusion to be drawn. Nepotism and unprofessionalism seem to have long been the norm at ADXS.
Even Lombardo was a former colleague of DOC and was brought in under DOC's watch. In fact all the major players still at ADXS were part of DOC's original team.
This is what makes the appointment of Lombardo as the Interim CEO and keeping him in that "temporary" title for so long so odd.
It's the same BOD and pretty much the same people that were there when DOC was the CEO. Is that really supposed to result in a dramatically different outcome than the one that DOC was leading?
I sure hope so, but based on the evidence so far I am no longer certain.
At this point 95% of my hopes is based on the follow the money and follow the greed theory. There are hedge funds that have milked ADXS like a prize dairy cow for years. Going forward it seems logical that the best way for them to make money now is to run ADXS PPS up. Either for an eventual sale or so they can reestablish another short position from much higher levels. Rinse, wash, repeat.
While I would love to see ADXS acquired at a price that makes most of us whole, even if not entirely happy, the PPS is sure not trading like the company could be acquired anytime soon?
For every “comes out of nowhere” Tobira buyout example there are far more KITE, JUNO, or ABLX examples where the PPS clearly ran in the months and weeks previous to the final announcement on knowledge of discussions and anticipation of a buyout. Even ARIA ran in advance of the ultimate buyout.
Remember the hedge funds that have played this company like a fiddle have clearly been one step ahead for years now. Even the recent offering at $2 apparently leaked because buying volume from funds completely dried up in the couple weeks before it came, and some funds even sold their positions before the offering. Regardless whether anyone who has actually worked inside ADXS can be blamed or not, or if it was firms or hedge funds close to ADXS, it seems this company has never proven capable of keeping any meaningful secrets (except from retail shareholders).
Believe me, I would be happy to be proven wrong.
As far as some of the speculated buyout prices being thrown around go, Amgen and Merck are not public charities. They play hardball in negotiations, which is actually part of their fiduciary responsibility to their existing shareholders.
Excellent. Thanks for sharing.
This of course begs the question why Adage or no other entity has felt the need to do this over the past 3 years while under the watch of the current ADXS BOD the PPS has collapsed from $30 to $2?
Ummmm...may I suggest the possibility that they and other hedge funds may have actually benefitted from that PPS collapse?
Unfortunately, after the dumpster fire of the last 2 years, here is the mental image I get of ADXS management seemingly deciding to go into Silence mode. The Chief even resembles Lombardo a little bit...
Without taking a side in the Buyout is imminent or not discussion, I would like some responses from ADXS PR on this...
We had a 10M share offering at $2 that was supposedly “oversubscribed.” But it has resulted (so far) in not a single filing of any single entity that bought enough of those shares…or added to an existing position…to require a filing?
To make this even more strange, ADXS has heavily publicized the Buyers of past offerings…why not this one? Not even a single Buyer was willing to be identified? Why?
That is super odd to me and very atypical of the way these things usually work, or have even been handled in the past by ADXS.
I have no idea and I don't even want to hazard a guess.
And honestly, does it even matter?
Nothing personal against Noelle (I don't doubt her integrity or sincerity) but many of the comments or reassurances she has allegedly made...albeit according to those who have spoken to her...have proved to be generally inaccurate.
I hope Lombardo is one heck of a backroom deal maker...because if he is a good communicator or capable of being a strong public face of ADXS, I have yet to see evidence of that.
I think the bigger mystery is that even with the dumpster fire ADXS has become under Lombardo, the collapse of the PPS, the offering at $2, and a growing list of unanswered questions...so far it seems that Adage and Amgen back this current BOD and interim CEO.
Is that a good thing or a bad thing? I'm really not sure anymore.
I keep coming back to the offering.
I am not sure how an offering of 10M shares that was supposedly "oversubscribed" did not result in even a single filing? Not even one entity bought enough shares or added enough more shares to file?
It seems very weird to me. So much with this company does not make sense.
I definitely agree with you that it came across as a resume padding article.
Again though, I am cautious as to what this means. I certainly hope your belief of an imminent buyout or partnership proves to be accurate.
Personally I also thought the Bonstein article was bizarre. Considering the history, timing, and current circumstances at ADXS, at best it seems tone deaf. Worst case it seemed borderline delusional.
It reminded me of one of the scenes from my old Far Side desktop calendars.
I hear you, but it is Easter week. I can tell you that a lot of people took off for a long 3-4 day weekend. How about we see if they respond by next Friday? That gives them plenty of time.
MM2K, fair points. I have a background that leads me to agree with you that the "smoke" from this, even if just a PowerPoint change is strange timing to say the least. It certainly is not typical behavior in the industry.
But while you know I am totally in the 2 1/2 year short scheme suppression camp, I don't think that is mutually exclusive with poorly timed moves and decisions from ADXS management. I think both can be true at the same time.
Having said that, ADXS has done more than a few things in the past 12 months that have made me wonder how many of these people had their jobs or kept their jobs. This starts first and foremost with the BOD.
In previous posts I have said ADXS is a play toy of the hedge funds that control it. I think we saw the truth of that in the fact that the BOD did not get more Withhold votes and no alternatives were stood up by Adage, Amgen, or any other major funds.
That means while we retail shareholders have been getting raped, the people that control the majority of voting shares are making money off this BOD and Senior Management. We know they haven't made any money on the long side in almost 3 years. That means they have been making bank on the short side for the last 2 years plus. So they are more than happy to leave the current stooges in place.
To what end and whether ultimately we end up at $10 or under $1 I am no longer sure.
FBG, don't get me wrong, at this point I hope you are right.
However, as Iggy mentioned in an earlier post, this might be the weirdest run company ever. It is like a science experiment.
I bet Yvonne Patterson is sorry she sold the rights to her genius research to a company that is the proverbial donkey versus a racing stallion.
FBG,
I'm still not convinced these 5 people are actually gone? We have no confirmation of that yet do we?
It's definitely odd, like so many things going on with this company right now, but I think we need to at least remain open to that benign reason just being an adjustment to a PowerPoint deck.
Even if they are gone I am not sure it's because of a buyout either, unless they were given a deal that saw all their Options and RSU's vest immediately. You can't fire senior management "before" a buyout unless you give them the same deal to walk they would get on the day a sale closed. If you do you will be facing a lawsuit you will likely lose.
I would rank the options in highest order of probability...
1. They are all still there (60%)
2. They were let go to reduce costs (30%)
3. They were given a package in advance of a buyout (10%)
Ironically, #2 would not be a positive in the long term. Cutting costs by shutting down R&D and trials in the franchises farthest from commercialization, and gutting senior staff and important organization may save money now...but is akin to the movie Apollo 13 where the crew has to start scuttling and discarding parts to cut weight so they can try to survive a 1 way trip back to earth.
I agree with you on the filing requirements, but Hornet's post still begs the question...
Who did they sell the shares too? Are we supposed to believe it was like 10 different parties at 1M each? Really? Or was it entities that wanted only the max amount of shares that would allow them to avoid reporting? Why would they care so much about whether they had to report a buy or not?
I am not challenging you, I am speaking to the oddness of 10M shares getting placed, supposedly even oversubscribed, and yet not a single filing yet by anyone about anything? Not even just 1 filing from one entity?
Something is not adding up for me on this. Maybe things get clearer in time, but so far Lombardo's tenure does not appear to be very impressive.
Hornet, I agree that these types of changes don't usually just randomly happen. Certainly not with that many senior level people at the same time. It seems odd / questionable to say the least.
Beyond that the Forrest Gump metaphors are always good for a laugh. The "I wouldn't even look back for Bubba" line always makes me chuckle.
JCKRDU is referring to the retention bonus plan given to Lombardo, Bonstein, and Petit last July to stay thru March 2018
Well stated
Of course the benign answer is that they weren't removed at all, it's just a change in ADXS approach to only highlight the top 3 people in the top 3 positions.
So all 5 may still be working at ADXS for now.
Although, from my past experience, these changes may appear subtle, but are the first move in masking potential exits being planned by the company but not implemented yet.
I bet for sure the senior managers at ADXS who were removed are aware they are no longer featured.
All speculation at this point. Time will tell if this means anything.
As JCKRDU already pointed out, these individuals did not receive retention bonuses.
But just for hypothetical argument's sake, let's pretend they did. I can tell you it is almost unheard of for 50% or more of the senior leadership to leave at the same time unless they were forced out or bought out.
At least some of them would continue to collect a very handsome paycheck remaining at their level, and one or two of their peers leaving might open up opportunities for advancement for them by remaining.
No...something interesting appears to be happening.
Whether it ends up being good or bad for us shareholders I have no idea.
Iggy,
I used to believe that too, then these guys did an offering for 10M shares at $2. Something I never thought they would do.
This isn't about the value of ADXS science, which may very well be worth $2B-$4B in fair market value. This is about the ability of ADXS management and BOD to harvest that value.
At this point, even if not entirely their fault after the 2 1/2 year short scheme here, this BOD and management team does not inspire much confidence in me. I don't think ADXS has the human leadership talent or the financial resources to ever achieve ADXS maximum potential.
I hope they prove me wrong.