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.
No, 11m shares short is just noise. But that doesn't stop it from being a constant topic on this board.
I blame FINRA-banned former analyst Larry Smith for bringing up the ridiculous notion of naked shorting of nwbo.
Why anyone listens to Smith is another mystery. Taking investment advice from him is the equivalent of taking legal advice from a disbarred lawyer.
Short interest had dropped into the 5-6 million range by April, 2020. It only bumped up again as warrants were extended.
I don't think that is just a coincidence.
You're comparing relatively unknown nwbo to entities like the L.A. Lakers and Harvard University that returned PPP funds.
The program was designed for small firms, and 12 employees with under $1m per quarter in revenue fits quite well.
nwbo should have applied for PPP, and full credit to them if they did.
A month of PPP covering payroll, plus the June warrant exercising, might avoid a round of dilution.
I agree that's not significant in the long run, but helps in the short run. Certainly useful for a firm that manages its cash month to month.
You have become quite the optimist.
On planet nwbo, multi-week processes can easily become multi-month processes. They can also multiply like tribbles.
A few of those and my July 1, 2021 guess is still in play.
nwbo's price action today is all part of Linda's master plan. Do not expect to understand that as it is beyond the ken of mere mortals.
Also, do not pay any attention to the woman behind the curtain.
No seminars, but happy to answer any questions about stock-based charitable contributions, which I strongly support.
You should think about instructions to the charity. Perhaps donor recommends immediate sale. The issue is valuation. With immediate sale, you can agree that the value of your donation is the value realized on sale by the non-profit.
Technically the value should be based on receipt, but that is challenging with a large donation or liquidity issues, and outside the expertise of some charities.
If they don't receive many stock donations, you might have to nag a bit to get the process managed well.
Donating appreciated shares is the tax efficient approach. Assuming US taxation:
Make sure the charity is properly registered as a 501c3. Ask for a copy of their Form 990 and/or check them out on Guidestar. That's minimum due diligence for non-profits.
Ask if they are set up to receive stock donations. You'll need to send your broker a Letter of Authorization which requires some info from the recipient. It should include:
Your Name as shown on account
Account number
Stock to transfer (name and ticker or CUSIP)
Number of shares to transfer (and ideally number remaining as a check)
Recipient info:
Name
Address
Phone
DTC
Broker
AccountID
"... medics in the know are pushing their patients to get this treatment"
Really? Doctors are pushing patients toward dcvax-l treatment that is currently unavailable? Even when they know they can only provide another courses of action? Teasing with an unavailable treatment sounds great for patient morale.
You are definitely suggesting something - a wildly optimistic point of view on pent up UK demand for dcvax that is not supported by facts.
GBM patients don't just sit on the shelf like widgets in inventory.
Are you suggesting that they are just sitting in Dr. Ashkan's waiting room hoping for dcvax?
Probably not, which means that they are pursuing SOC or whatever trials or treatment is available.
Do you think they abandon that treatment for a not-yet-approved dcvax? If some would, then would NHS fund that?
That's without even considering whether these potential patients had surgery, and had sufficient tumor material saved to make dcvax.
It took nwbo over a decade to recruit 331 patients for the P3 trial. No new patients for 5 years in that trial. That is not a state of affairs that lends itself to visibility or excitement.
Yet you believe they can magically find 35-50 patients per month, prior to approval, and get paid for treating those patients?
I think that is a wee bit optimistic...
P(at least one succeeds) = 1 - P(all fail)
Based on your wildly optimistic assumptions, that would be
1 - (.3 * .3 * .3) = .973 or 97.3%
If you prefer a sports analogy, it's the same math as a 70% free throw shooter with 3 attempts.
You are making the very questionable assumption that all P3 trials have the same probability of success.
Do you seriously believe that a tiny company, in its first FDA experience, has the same success rate as Merck or Pfizer?
My take on Cofer Black is that he is retired and selling his rolodex, with some suspect judgment as to his compatriots.
Regarding nwbo, I've seen no evidence that he has taken an active role in anything beyond collecting options. He is only listed on one Board committee (Conflicts, which includes Related Party transactions).
I hope that folks have been joking about Black going all CIA on nefarious anti-nwbo factions, but you never know with this board. It would be sad if anyone actually believed that fiction.
Delusional.
They have enough blended blinded data to do all sorts of work on OS, but don't bother with the primary endpoint. "PFS has not yet been evaluated...". That is BURYING the primary endpoint, likely due to low expectations, to focus on something they think might be more promising.
How many times have you seen another company publish without evaluating the primary endpoint?
Tweaks to the process might explain why nwbo added the section on "equivalency studies" to its list of potential risks in SEC filings.
Changes in manufacturing methods for DCVax-L could require us to conduct equivalency studies and/or additional clinical trials.
nwbo management also gets their warrants and options for free.
If it weren't for people commenting outside their expertise, this would be a largely empty forum.
An endpoint succeeds if the trial produces statistically significant unblinded positive results.
In 2017 nwbo had accrued sufficient events that they could have done PFS analysis. They chose to continue rather than stop and analyze data then. They cannot have "met" the PFS endpoint because they have never published data for that endpoint.
ROTFL. The primary endpoint was mentioned once in a 30+ page paper. That is BURIED, at least by any rational definition.
July 10 is both National Kitten Day and National Pina Colada Day. Guessing the latter is more relevant here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burisma_Holdings
I suggest you read the sections on Management and Investigations.
And yes, being a member of the Board of a corrupt foreign company is stunningly poor judgment for a former CIA official.
There was no exercise.
In each Form 4 you see values under A (acquisition) for either warrants or options.
If there had been an exercise, you would see values under D (disposition) for options/warrants and a corresponding increase in common shares.
The posts about exercise are either someone not understanding the filings, or deliberately trying to mislead.
If Cofer Black is so smart, then how did he get involved in the Burisma fiasco (as a Board member, along with Hunter Biden) in Ukraine?
Seems to have lost his mojo.
I don't think it tells you anything predictive about results. Unless you think management is secretly unblinded, that's just hope rather than analysis.
It does make it abundantly clear that there is a huge disconnect between the best interest of insiders and retail longs.
Anyone who thinks Linda Powers does not take care of herself above all else, check out the Form 4 filings.
Last year the 10-Q included:
"Between February 2018 and April 2018, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Linda Powers, loaned the Company aggregate funding of $5.4 million, and the Company entered into convertible Note agreements for this amount (the “Convertible Notes”). The Notes were 15-day demand notes, intended as temporary bridge loans. However, they remained unpaid and outstanding throughout the year.
On November 11, 2018, the Company and Ms. Powers agreed to further extend the forbearance on the notes to a maturity of one year following the respective funding dates. In consideration of the continuing forbearance, the Company agreed to issue warrants representing 50% of the repayment amounts of the Notes. The warrants were anticipated have exercise price at $0.35 per share, and have an exercise period of 2 years. However, the Company has not finalized the terms of the warrant agreement."
Now one of her Form 4 filings says 5 year term and $0.21 strike price.
If that kind of self-dealing isn't illegal, it certainly should be.
Agreed on timing. RS mainly makes sense if nwbo has all its ducks in a row to relist on NASDAQ. Don't think they are anywhere near that point based on continued fundings of the style that initially led to downlisting.
One scenario where RS might occur is missing stat sig on PFS and OS, but hyping a subgroup as worth continuing research. Not a prediction, just talking scenarios.
nwbo's history includes 2 reverse splits. I think you are dismissing the idea too easily.
Even with P3 failure, Linda Powers might try to keep nwbo alive even if it is only to benefit Advent.
You are confusing the terminology.
1.2b is the share authorization limit, approved by shareholders in April, 2018.
The shelf refers to the S-3 filing by nwbo to raise up to $150m. That is not approved by shareholders. The latest was filed October, 2019, and is the basis for subsequent Prospectus Supplements.
Cofer Black has prior experience on the Board of Burisma.
If nwbo ever decides to enter Ukraine or the natural gas industry, that experience could be critical.
Besides, his name belongs in a Robert Ludlum novel. Every Board needs a person with a spy novel name.
A filer does not always have complete information. That's normal.
nwbo could easily have footnoted that there was a tax dispute with German authorities. That's not filing anything incorrect. It's no different from their past statements about lawsuits they were defending.
It's certainly not an excuse for being over 5 weeks late.
And it is highly unusual for a CFO to be reassigned between an NT 10-Q filing and the actual 10-Q.
No, accurate to the best of their ability. It is perfectly acceptable to file a 10-K or 10-Q, then amend as necessary.
nwbo has made such amended filings on a number of occasions.
Your pretend expertise is noted.
If things were as you claim, then nwbo seeking transparency on one issue (taxes in Germany, a country they have largely exited) is causing complete non-transparency on every other detail in the 10-Q.
That's a poor tradeoff for anyone seeking to be well-informed.
I have no stake in nwbo and never have, long or short.
Following nwbo has convinced me that Linda Powers is a poor CEO who places her own interests above shareholders. The fact that so many supposed "loyal longs" claim to not see her conflicts of interest is what really speaks volumes.
Already done. Wouldn't have posted about it otherwise.
Thank you for motivating me to drop a line to our regulators.
SEC inquiries would be more interesting, at least a call to Jean Davis.
It has been over 5 weeks since nwbo's NT filing. I was way wrong when I told someone it should only be a few days delay as has been typical in the past.
The historical Linda Powers pattern is to take a typical milestone and decompose it into as many pieces as possible. Make each a multi-month process. Dole them out slowly to the long-suffering longs.
Instead of TLD, tease data lock. Not so fast. Maybe just soft data lock, whatever that means. I'm sure it can be further divided further. The 6/2 PR is a masterpiece example:
- review processes at sites
- shipping of tissue slides
- data collection
- identification and resolution of queries
- data checking and confirmation
- site signoffs
- monitoring visits
Building on your airplane analogy, I think the applicable phrase is "foaming the runway" for a bumpy landing.
After the 10-Q. Don't rush things.
No way to know whether the shares from the warrant exercise were flipped. There has been plenty of volume lately to absorb 9m.
I think there is a more interesting point. These warrants were likely close to expiration. Perhaps they were part of the 62m May/June that LP had expected to expire, but then nwbo's stock price moved up enough to put them in the money. Recall this line from the 5/20/20 8-K:
During May and June, 2020, approximately 62 million warrants have expired or are scheduled to expire...
I wonder if part or all of the other 53m May/June warrants are now in the money, or if they expired too soon to benefit.