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 think we’ve been waiting for the market to “wake up” for a long time. My shares aren’t being sold at these levels. I think it’s crazy to sell for anything under $1.
The market is saying it isn’t worth $1 billion at present
We all need to remember, any buyout over 50 cents a share comes with 50 million cashback to the buyer. That’s outstanding warrant money. It’s really the only major liability NWBO has outstanding.
I would imagine that management has no interest in a buyout less than 5-10 billion with the technology and data they possess.
Couldn’t that be due to the mechanism of teaching the immune system the antigens of the tumor?
I think Direct needs more study....
So 23 of 39 patients exceeding survival time by an average of 11 months is coincidence, despite injections into a singular tumor?
Neither of us can say definitively if this was related to treatment or not. I’ll admit to it being an unknown. Still too early in the game on this one.
We spend a lot of time here debating DCVAX -L. Let’s talk Direct. Wondering what 2 years of rights to Direct under right to try law be worth? Is there any marketability to this product based on P1 data?
Remember in the P1 trial under right tobtry scenarios, there were a number of patients that responded to treatment. This shouldn’t be swept under me the rug as we wait for L unblinding.
GLTY...hopefully you’ll have a happy retirement.
Well done Marz! Hang on for the ride.
So Linda just invested $5 million of her own money just to pay her own salary? What kind of special minded person would believe that?
I think the misinformation being spread through this post is typical of the desperation on the short side of this argument. If NWBO can’t be put out of business soon, the revenue they’re about to generate from an industry changing product could be staggering. I look forward to how it will impact my investment here.
Keep pumping the negativity. It feeds the unbelievable value in this security. I hope to buy more at these levels.
Not more dilution. Just not issued warrants expiring worthless.
Not a crappy deal. More dilution would have been worse. These loans can be paid off with warrant money once the market reacts to the trial meeting endpoints and approval is imminent. Maybe they can even be paid off with right to try revenue.
They’re not all liars and thieves. But they’re human. They’re motivated by $$, just like any capitalist.
Well said. Undisputed evidence is needed and that is what the naysayers are afraid of. I would imagine most big pharmas don’t have the patience to pull off a trial like this. Anybody else ever witness an 11 year trial in the cancer space?
It’s like printing money. But instead, naked shifters print shares of OTC securities.
Nothing was incorrect.
The warrants may have been given, but the shares have to be purchased. The company gets money for those.
Warrants aren’t free. The holder has to buy the shares
I know the game well, but put patients first.
I wonder why Dr Liau doesn’t speak out more in defense of her trial? May not be her M.O. She comes off as the strong, silent type who prefers to do great work for others behind the scenes.
I see a patient injustice brewing here and that almost bothers me more than the potential loss of an investment.
To become a doctor, typically a student must possess an undergraduate degree in one of the basic sciences. For sure, there are at least minimum requirements for physical science education to be successful on the MCAT. I would take it as far as to say that a doctor is trained as a scientist prior to becoming a physician.
What frustrates me about the statements made by Dr Stupp and Dr Fine is that they are ignorant to the science here. They plead the opposing view to DCVax being the reason for extended survival in this trial without evidence of their claims. While their concerns about screening could be construed as evidence, they have no proof of other prognostic factors for “selective screening for this trial”. It’s like they forgot how to be scientists. After all, science is all hypothesis with no data or evidence. What would be the motivation for such a hypothesis from the opposing side? Despite their knowledge, degrees, and successes, they are competitors to this technology and most likely have research grants from companies that compete in this space. Both should have at least disclosed potential conflicts of interest for the article.
I’m pretty sure that “the Street” is in the dark about the science here. I’d imagine they feel that because this company has no revenue or product, that they can play with the stock for a while. But that changes with a successful trial, approval, and revenue. It may have already changed with right to try.
Time will tell if this penny graduates to dollars. Their technology is incredibly promising. Demand usually follows that.
Thanks Alpha. Your comment gave the reasoning behind why I had discredited Stupp’s comments outright. He and Dr Fine both should have disclosed conflicts of interest for the article.
What does she need to raise money for? To wait this trial out? She needs money to unblind and seek FDA approval. That’s it. Her expenses are minimal at this point.
Warrants expiring worthless probably having an anti-dilutive effect. Would love to get above .50 to have some of those cashed in. The company’s only real liability is in outstanding warrants...no significant debt here. Bankruptcy is off the table unless the trial fails and the trial appears to be a resounding success.
Dr Stupp and Dr Fine have shown that their loyalty is to $ and not science. Glad this trial demonstrated that as a tertiary endpoint.
I’ve worked in medicine my whole career and have seen how money infects the profession. Treatment is usually determined by what doctors can bill for and not always what is best for the patient.
Hospitals are no better. They tell doctors how to treat patients based on how they are be reimbursed.
The most powerful organizations in medicine are CMS and insurance companies. They dictate treatment with their reimbursement. If they aren’t reimbursing medical professionals and facilities for a treatment, nobody is getting that treatment.
Stupp’s data was controlled and, some may argue, optimized. You could have a placebo with Optune, but I also understand his argument that it would inconvenience patients for no reason (Just like the device currently inconveniences patients) I think Optune adds a benefit over SOC, but there were some arguable shortcuts to the pure science of the trial.
There could be some arguments about the screening of the P3 DCVAX trial (most notably the number of patients screened), but from what I have seen, it doesn’t seem that the patients were cherry picked.
I still think Stupp is motivated to compete with the DCVax technology. While he may be a respected neurosurgeon, he also is a human. Nobody really likes losing. The real question about his character is whether he can lose with integrity or if he cheats to win.
Their statements indicate that they may be upset about their research being beat by a girl.
I’m betting on the filly here.
The best results sometime take lots of time to produce. I’d imagine that BP doesnt have patience for a trial like this. Look at the resources it has taken to get this trial to fruition. BP clearly didn’t want to take this risk and I’m not sure I blame them. It’s far more ideal to pay the billions for a successful product than to risk a hundred $500 million trials.
I’d imagine that all this shorting and rhetoric are a recipe to buy this on the cheap. But I’m not selling here. I can’t imagine who would. The risk is fairly low here now. The results are going to be positive, whenever they publish.
GLTY
One more thought...Is Stupp out there digging for the reason that people on the trial are living far beyond expectations for patients with GBM on his protocol? Did he offer any reasonable explanation as to why the patients on the DCVAX trial are doing so well? Or did he just cast doubt based on the things like patient screening, which is typical of all naysayers.
I didn’t get to read the article. I hope that he offered something tangible on which to rest his doubts.
His motivations for questioning the data are probably selfish. While my motivations may be selfish too, I wasn’t invested until I saw that the P3 data had a good chance to for success based on the 2017 ASCO talk. Stupp and his research have been competing with this technology for years. I’d imagine he wouldn’t like hearing about the Liau protocol if this become SOC.
Science is a big race for the truth and scientists are in some ways no different than race car drivers.
I think it really depends on what kind of information they want from the long survival tail. If you live 36 months, what are your chances of living 60 months? They seem to really want to get as much data as they can about the tail. That is the hold up here.
Any way you plot it, the mOS at this point in the trial will beat historical SOC by months. But they’re trying to glean statistically significant information about the tail. That seems to be the new value to patients from this trial. Our principal investigator once again is advocating for patients. Kudos to her.
Shame on the FDA for not getting access to people for this vaccine based on early and interm blinded data. They seem to be on the side of being overly cautious while patients continue to suffer from lack of treatment options for GBM.
You can imagine where Dr Stupp’s loyalties lie...his own protocol. Competition in science is fierce. Where one sees hope, another sees doubt. Only the data will prove Stupp wrong and we just have to wait for it.
I’m waiting for the river card. Shorts are all in. Pot could get really big here.
Let them flash their kings and their puppets call the play by play.
Let them slow play it. You could plot the data that they have put out in any way possible and it will show efficacy. It’s like having Aces. Even if they have to partner for a couple of years or give a little up to get to market, this thing is a winner.
Even Pixar partnered with Disney for a while before Disney broke down and gave them the big buyout.
Imagine you could watch a game of Texas hold ‘em and bet on the player with the winning hand slow play the game. You would just enjoy the emotion of the game and the other players sit there and push each other around and bluff and yap. But in the end, you know your player has the aces and all you have to do is wait for the river card.
That’s exactly what investing in NWBO is like. It may be painful to bleed chips in the short term, but just wait to see how big the pot is when that river card falls.
Sweet. When it gets low enough, I’ll buy some more. Until then, I’ll let my shares ride. Only the desperate sell here.
I’m not sure I buy the naked short theory anymore. I think the shorts have covered. Now, the hedgies may be talking it down to slowly accumulate at these ridiculous prices.
We’ll probably never know what’s going on, but I’m patient and have every intention of holding on. SOS was right. Chance of bankruptcy here is nil before unblinding. Even with more dilution, they’ll get to approval. That’s when things get interesting. This will Zens up being SOC for GBM.
Good time to buy more.
Dr Stupp is the primary investigator for the trial that established the current standard of care (SOC) for treating GBM. Currently the SOC is radiation followed by temolozide (Temodar). Adding Temodar to radiation added 2 months of median overall survival to GBM patients as the result of his trial back in, I believe, 2005.
But remember, he hasn’t been wrong about the toxic dilutions and financials of this company. He is only wrong when he dismisses the science of their technology out of hand.
May not need lower dose radiation, but lower number of fractions. Treat tumors in 10 fractions or less with biologically equivalent doses. Then kick in the immune system.
We could manage the treatment and the cost of treatment much better. But there is really little incentive to lower the cost of therapy.