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.
He didn't miss your point at all, and he responded rather well. You have it backwards - there will be a buyout if there is a market, not the other way around. You presuppose that there is no market for the drug AND that there is no appetite for a BP buyout. However, both of those (as others have stated) are unfounded and emotional statements. Note that I didn't say that they were WRONG, just that they're unfounded by concrete information at this point. This is why people get annoyed with your comments. You make sweeping, critical statements that often can't currently be backed by publicly available information. The fact that many here agree to at least some degree with your criticisms of management and frustration with missed timelines get lost in the mix.
Most others on this board presuppose that there will be a market for the drug if and when approved due to the apparent efficacy and lack of serious side effects. This is based on the data that we've actually seen from early stage clinical studies that have been peer reviewed and presented. And yes, we're all aware of the rebounds. We can have another discussion about why we're not overly concerned (I didn't say unconcerned) about the rebounds if you would like.
If there is a market, logically there would be buyout interest at some juncture, probably around critical data from P3 trials. If there is a market for the drug, BP will not collude to keep the drug off the market by not buying. There is more than one player in the biotech market, and I'm sure that many of them would love to have a drug that drinks Gilead's milkshake in the HIV world. Someone will pay for it to either take or defend market share.
In conclusion, at a minimum, I think that you're seriously underestimating the side effects of HAART and the advantage of a less toxic therapy that is also easier to maintain with your dosing. If the drug works well in P3 trials, it will likely do well. If it doesn't do well in trials, we're all hosed. And we all know that perfectly well, just as we know perfectly well that we're currently underinformed about the status of P3 trials.
Thanks for the responses. I noticed that they don't want to provide information to you until you provide it to them - something I'm hesitant to do. JPG's suggestion that this is commonplace/frivolous is helpful. Still, if anyone does happen to provide information to the firm and get a response with more details, I'd love to hear it. Thanks all.
Does anyone have more information on the shareholder alert re: CYDY being investigated for breach of fiduciary duty?
That's my guess as well, JPG. The concessions from the FDA on protocol, including N, for adjunct P3 (or P2b/3...) aren't dissimilar from what you'd expect for a BTD drug anyway. I'm guessing the FDA wants full adjunct data for BTD, and CYDY wants BTD for expediting mono P3.
This is a really good point, trding. Thought about it this morning when I read the 8k and looked over the powerpoint, but I hadn't connected those dots before. If it's me... I'd want to be in the mono trial. It probably is poaching some patients from adjunct.
Can't blame Marty, or anyone else, for wanting out. The delays are frustrating and definitely invite the possibility of more dilution. But as others have pointed out, it's about the science and the results at the end of the day. If nothing has changed there, well... how patient can you be?
Very much looking forward to this CC in a few weeks for a little more clarity.
In a word - yes, it's that simple. Most institutional investors and hedge funds are limited, either by policy or statutorily, from investing in OTC markets directly. Therefore, uplisting would allow massive buy side pressure assuming that there is interest. Also, any open shorts would have to cover at uplisting since the ticker closes and a new one is issued, which would add more buy side pressure. Uplisting would very likely be a good thing for SP, even with all the warrants out there that might cash in at that point.
Good question on the criteria for patients in clinical trials vs. use on the market. That's above my pay grade. I'm sure Misiu could provide good information here if she's around, as well as any of our other friends with a medical background or extensive biotech experience...
Hey Everest, welcome (publicly) to the board. Love the name, by the way.
From what I can tell, nobody has a definitive answer here and the company isn't talking for the moment. Last we heard, a few months back they had seven patients. No official updates on that front, so they could have seven patients or they could have filled up a month ago. A couple of thoughts that have been kicked around though.
- Pearsby thinks they haven't been able to enroll anyone. But you already knew that from following the board.
- There was a Q&A a while back with Dr. Pourhassen that suggested that getting sites enrolled took time, then the patients had to be identified and enrolled after that. Some of us probably conflate the time for those two separate activities, making it seem like a longer wait. They had stopped getting sites online while they were negotiating the adjunct protocol with the FDA. I can try to find the link, but it's already referenced in one of my posts on this board I believe.
- Good, clean data is paramount, as you know. Some speculate that they're being hyper vigilant about getting the exact right patients to make sure that they have the best possible results. This makes some sense given the reduced size of the trial - a "random" error caused by sub-par screening would have an outsize effect on PE. Management may be less worried about a few extra weeks here and there than they are about absolutely nailing the adjunct data.
- They could already be fully enrolled and completed, and potentially even have successful PE's in hand. As Chump and others have discussed, getting the stock uplisted is crucial. Having several elements of good news on tap would help the SP to a point where they could uplist before shorts drove it back down. The gamesmanship argument here is certainly plausible, but I'm sure there's a relatively short window on how long they can sit on material information such as positive or negative PE's.
Disclaimer: I don't know anything or suggest that one of these possibilities is more likely than any other, these are just ideas that have been floated on the board by smarter people than me. Well, mostly.
Thanks for our daily reminder of everything in the universe that could potentially go wrong for CYDY.
Hope they are... because I thought the LAST two weeks were going to be interesting!
Idle talk while we wait for news... I can't speak for anyone else, but the Dom isn't in the fridge just yet.
Some communication from Caracciolo would be nice, as you suggest. My hope is that the lack of communication is an abundance of caution against potentially violating SEC disclosure rules while negotiating. If that turns out to be the case, I'll certainly forgive the radio silence.
Yeah, could have easily been someone trading the price movement as well. Picking up 40k at ~$0.60 and selling at $0.68 isn't a bad Wednesday. Most of us are in for the hope of a big score, but I'll also take ~13% on most any trade in the span of a few days.
Haven't had a chance this morning boom, but I appreciate you checking. Unfortunately trading isn't my big boy job and I'm prepping to travel cross country in a few minutes. I absolutely will be checking it out in the next few days though, and will report back if I have any issues. Thanks again to you and trding for the info!
Spreads have tightened up nicely as well. Feels like the lows might be behind us barring negative PR.
Awesome, thanks for the info boom and trding. I'll have to check out those resources. Information is money.
Interesting context trding, thanks. Does sound pretty crooked. Unfortunately I don't have access to that level of information, but sounds like that might be happening to some degree. Ah, the perils of being but a small fish in a big pond...
Indeed. I've missed limit orders for the last three days in a row by $0.0002. Perhaps I'm stingy, but at least I'm principled.
Let me know if you ever want a price floor on something.
Right there with you - never love seeing a SP lower than my average dollar cost. But volume is generally stronger and there's obviously buying pressure, so you've gotta be happy about that at a minimum. Love to see BTD tomorrow, but I'm not sure today says a thing about BTD or anything else. And it's all about the PE's at the end of the day. That's how we're making money and sending drinks around the pool (or to the craps table, for Chump) in Vegas.
BTD and another decent SP move wouldn't hurt my feelings though. I always sleep better when trades are in the green, whether they're where I expect them to be yet or not. And I like my sleep.
Oddly quiet from Pearsby today. Guess shorts didn't fare well.
Well, that's a bit more comforting day re: SP.
I'm not really part of the club here, but hey, I like Vegas and so does the wife. If this thing goes big, give me a weekend and I'll send some drinks over from a distance!
Apparently concepts of risk, return, and alternate investment choices are beyond your grasp. Not surprising, as most of your posts read eerily similar to Donald Trump's tweets.
See everyone tomorrow morning for another day of excitement.
Excellent. Glad to hear that you're trading on your convictions.
Next time sell a few pennies lower so my limit orders fill, please.
Appreciate the concern, but I'm far from naive in any way.
And I might suggest again that, if you think we're being played, you should probably get off the train while you can get $0.60 a share.
The real time data being submitted for the BLA is not publicly available at this point. Are you suggesting that FDA insiders are driving the share price down?
As others have mentioned, it's obvious that you're either trolling or don't have the belief in the science and opportunity required to make this a reasonable, supportable investment. You may do well to simply get off the train at the next stop.
Apologies that nobody jumped at the chance to provide you with publicly available information. Your vast contributions to the board and clear effort at due diligence entitled you to much better.
Off the top of my head (which means I may be slightly incorrect), the January raise was $1.2 million, and the February raise was $4.25 million. Both at $0.75, with a warrant (strike of $1, I believe) for every two shares. You can do the math on shares per raise versus outstanding shares if you care that much. Not sure about the December raise, I haven't followed it for that long. I bet Google can tell you - the prospectus is available on more than simply whichever site wouldn't open it properly for you.
Sarcasm and condescension aside, you're not incorrect that sometimes this board is a handful.
Pearsby, I actually enjoy your contrarian posts to some degree because it's always worth hearing both sides. But you have no clue what GILD has interest in. None. Zero. Just like the rest of us. And if you did, you wouldn't/couldn't be posting about it. You can't make statements like that and then jump on another poster for saying "BTD is 100% guaranteed."
Lose the hyperbole and frenetic need to tout trial numbers that we all know by heart, and people may actually take you seriously. Your points generally aren't objectively bad, but your presentation needs serious work.
Good news guys... I figured out how to put a floor on the SP. All you have to do is ask me to put in a bottom fishing limit order. It'll trade within a few hundredths of a penny, but not clear.
I'll run this scam on demand for commission from now on.
Amen WallStreet. Nothing new to say at this point. Just make your choice - in or out - and wait until news worth hearing.
Hopefully we won't have to wait too long.
Was that another big chunk or two for sale?
Thanks for the perspective on the timing of BTD decisions by the FDA, much appreciated. Also, I agree with you across the board.
Completely agree that all that matters at the end of the day is whether or not the trials hit the primary endpoints. That said, I consider it prudent to keep monitoring that "noise" up until then to - objectively - determine whether it provides any value in assessing the probability of hitting endpoints. Otherwise, it's kind of like having the ability to bet on a football game at any point during the game, but choosing to place your bet prior to the game and then not watching.
Ok, maybe a bad example given that the last meaningful football game would have resulted in about 99% of folks taking the wrong bet by halftime! But the point remains that meaningful information can be gained from markets, otherwise nobody would watch the markets. Any information is money.
Here's to hoping for good news on those PE's so that the rest of it is, indeed, noise.
Marty, I'll respectfully take my advice on objectivity in investing from those with more profound thoughts than "this stock will go up or down". It's obvious that a sell order sextupling the average daily volume would likely crater the share price. I do, however, think that it is relevant that two quick orders near the bell accounting for one quarter of average daily volume did NOT crater the share price.
If you'd like to objectively discuss other meaningful indicators, I'll be all ears. I'm only here for two things: to learn and to make money. In that order, if need be.
He's simply suggesting that there was enough liquidity in bids to cover that huge chunk that sold at the bell. For an OTC penny stock, being able to absorb that sale looks like decent liquidity to me.
Sounds like it. Good news is that that much volume actually cleared that quickly at a relatively close spread. At least folks are still buying.
Anyone have good volume data? Was that whole chunk from one seller?
Crazy volume at the bell, brought SP down a tick.
You have a point. Paulson is the placement agent in this arrangement, so the actual holdings go to private investors. Most of whom are probably selling their shares and holding the warrants, as you referenced. While that changes the calculus slightly, you still have those private investors willing to put the cash up at the same terms, indicating that they have roughly the same views on profitability of warrants at 1.00 strikes as they did before.
Don't know much about timing of BTD decisions, so I've asked about it a few times without much response. I would guess that the FDA takes the 60 days most of the time, as they would seem to have little to gain by not using the time at hand for due diligence. I could be wrong though, and if someone were to provide some evidence that many (positive) BTD decisions come through at 30-45 days, that would be some interesting food for thought.
On another note... low volume again pretty late in the day. Maybe everyone knows which side of the line they want to be on at this point, and it won't move much til news one way or the other.
Regarding the latest Paulson raise, I think that you're correct that almost anything we can say about the arrangement is pure speculation. I do, however, think that it's a positive that Paulson was willing to invest another chunk of change at the same terms (PPS, strike price for warrants, etc). To me, that says that the value proposition for them has not significantly changed, and that they expect the share price to (at a minimum) be well over a dollar to make money on the warrants. Even if the share price fell/falls significantly due to dilution.
All I know is that Paulson knows more than I do about the details of where CYDY and PRO 140 sit currently, and they still think that their money is good there at the same price as it was before. I'd prefer no dilution, but an in-the-know fund continuing to commit money on an as-needed basis without demanding better terms is a pretty positive spin on dilution, in my mind.
If they'd demanded that the warrants strike at 0.65 or something this go round, you'd have seen me head for the door yesterday.
Don't look at me... of course everyone here knew that they were low on cash based on stated positions and burn rates. I was just explaining the comment about dodging a bullet.
*Edited for unnecessary commentary*
He's referring to your posts roughly 36 hours ago that, had this capital raise occurred yesterday instead of today, looked a whole lot like inside information.
I didn't say that the capital raise was good news for shareholders. I would have strongly preferred that my alert this morning tell me that there had been a buyout. I think the fact that they appear to have terms with Paulson that looks a whole lot like a predetermined line of credit. You're wrong about the terms - they're identical to past raises. That's what I thought was good news. They're not out begging for money on different terms. Quite the opposite - Paulson apparently believes in the potential enough to willingly put in more cash on the exact same terms as before.