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.
Exactly, why take even a small chance of missing out?
It just isn't worth it the risk.
Better to hold onto NWBO and just be patient.
My patience has paid off thus far.
Bull, how does this article directly affect NWBO?
You've given an excellent analysis on NWBO and Mr. Feuerstein's disappearance.
NWBO won't even have to mumble about the side effects!
NWBO's commercials write themselves:
"While on DCVax you might experience a side effect: A light fever....oh sorry you wanted more...well no that's it...you might get a fever...maybe."
If it could bias the trial then even NWBO couldn't know and they wouldn't even build in a provision to let NWBO know that information.
Besides, even if the recommendation about a halt for efficacy wasn't shared with the public, there's no reason it couldn't be shared with the German, British, and maybe American regulators.
Normally Feuerstein attacks right away, not days later.
So why not?
Well, unless he's flat out delusional about NWBO, even Feuerstein can read the writing on the wall.
If Feuerstein writes another NWBO article now, this close to the finish line, well let's put it this way:
Even the finest craft beer in world can't help him keep down all of that crow.
Maybe I'm wrong and Feuerstein will attack tomorrow or soon after. Maybe if Smith finally writes an article first, then that will provoke an attack.
But I don't think so.
Unless Feuerstein is setting a complicated Buzdar style ambush, I think NWBO has him running scared and you will hear a lot less from him this year as compared to last.
Pyrr's analyst alter ego still hasn't publicized his views on NWBO.
Whatever Pyrr says here based upon holding July puts, he clearly does not want to make these same arguments under his real name.
I would say that the silence of his public persona represents his long term interest in maintaining his credibility as an analyst versus his short term interest in making sure he doesn't lose money on those puts.
Thanks to the relative anonymity of the Internet, Pyrr can actually have his cake and eat it too.
Dr. Bosch flatly refused to characterize the actual difference Method A and Method B.
NWBO has said little or nothing about the two methods in the past year.
Why?
Probably they fear intellectual property theft.
Remember that some countries with considerable resources, like China, operate according to a different set of standards and once scientists there know the activation method they can move quickly to get their treatment off the ground.
Remember that these are the guys who had bootleg translations of the latest Harry Potter novel out on the streets before the original English version even came out.
Piracy of DCVax is going to happen. It is too lucrative and too critical for everyone to pay by the rules.
NWBO wants to put off that evil day until it is strong and rich enough to defend its turf before dealing with the inevitable patent infringements that can and will occur with such a lucrative treatment.
That might explain why they're keeping a lower profile than I would like. You have to know the value of something before you try to steal it, after all.
But do not think piracy is a joke.
Countries like China could even justify their theft on humanitarian grounds, assuming they admit that they stole anything at all.
Getting the US government to do something about this theft requires money and political influence, two things that little NWBO patently lacks (no pun intended) and will continue to lack for a long time.
Why doesn't someone just ask Les Goldman to get the answer?
If they published the chart and showed the colors, I doubt it's a corporate secret.
No deciphering the meaning this time: DCVax Direct works.
This was the most detailed and clear presentation I've seen from NWBO to date. I can't think about how much clearer they can get.
The only confusion we have about the meaning of this presentation was manufactured by Pyrr, for reasons of his own.
Dr. Bosch probably considered randomized assignment self-evident.
That's why he didn't bring it up.
Remember that they were consciously comparing the two methods and were testing their expectation that they would get the same outcome.
Randomized assignment would be a fundamental condition for making a valid comparison.
Having to bring that up randomized assignment would be almost as bad as having to ask questions like these:
Hey Dr. Bosch, were the trial clinics and laboratories sanitary?
Now, Dr. Bosch, did you remember to have the patients complete informed consent forms?
On low volume we might, just might see a price drop due to price manipulation by desperate shorts but not a major sell off.
Remember if almost no one is selling then any price drop is simply "sound and fury, signifying nothing".
A lot hinges on whether NWBO follows up this morning with a PR and maybe scores some articles or stories on media outlets over the next several days.
Either way, why should we care? We have the information we need to accumulate with confidence and if the price stays low, to be happy about scooping up cheaper shares. Remember that Woodford was willing to pay a premium to the share price at the time to acquire a large number of shares.
You're forgetting improved quality of life over SOC which I doubt even you're disputing.
Even DCVax Direct offers only unimpressive overall survival that is comparable to SOC, this benefit would still come without the dire side effects of radiation and chemotherapy.
That is why Dr. Bosch emphasized that Phase 2 would be looking closely at Quality of Life considerations.
Leaving aside the humanitarian considerations, improved quality of life also has a financial benefit because it enables patients to work more and experience fewer and less expensive hospitalizations, even assuming they eventually succumb to cancer.
None of this matters if NWBO cannot cram down the price. But if it can, then quality of life and the safety of the therapy will be an important factor, not just if it adds months or years.
On what basis do you believe that Method A probably used diffrent criteria than Method B?
You seem to be arguing making the argument that Method A is a straw man against which they are pitting Method B and that they are using a false dichotomy to hide the overall shortcomings of Direct as a whole.
I would counter that NWBO has a vested long-term interest in finding and using the best method for the Phase 2 trial and this need would override short term considerations of share price.
This is the best, most information rich presentation I've heard from this company in a long time.
New information overload will be the only reason people don't sit up and take notice on Monday.
If they do, I'll feel good, and if not, more cheap shares.
Either way NWBO longs win.
It's about what the shorts don't know.
The shorts are probably hoping that NWBO is just over-promising and under-delivering again and that the new data will disappoint longs and receive a ho-hum from the markets.
But that is just a hope based upon past history not knowledge.
I think they're afraid that this time is different.
Remember, that this announcement with less than a week's notice left shorts in a bind.
If the shorts tried to close their positions too quickly they would precipitate the very price spike and short squeeze they were trying to avoid.
Thus they confined their efforts to price manipulation on the edges.
If they're right and the NWBO new data reveal fizzles, well then they contained the damage that a run-up on the rumor would have caused.
If they're wrong, they're just as out of luck either way and all they did was determine when the inevitable short squeeze would happen.
Agreed, and that is why I anticipate good news while acknowledging that they did not promise positive information but only new information.
It's pretty slow if the grammar police are patrolling.
I stand corrected on the usage and will try to do better but I'd point out that history is on my side of this.
The distinction between data and datum is collapsing almost as rapidly as the difference between who and whom.
They're promising new information about Direct survival, yes, but ironically not whether it will be good news or bad news.
So while we're all anticipating positive information, I never said they promised positive information but only that they promised new information.
If they release new information that is bad then they would have still kept their promise.
That's a big if.
But the cost of the booth is not really what allowed shorts to ridicule NWBO and caused frustration for longs.
The ridicule and frustration stem from how big a deal was made out of the booth before ASCO last year and how little was heard about it during ASCO and afterwards.
This year should be different because much more specific promises about the kinds of information we'll be hearing have been made.
But one way or another, we'll see.
I might buy into that if it were known that Mr. Woodford or one of his lieutenants was present at ASCO.
You may be right, and I would love for you to be.
Certainly I am not betting money on my prediction.
I am just holding my shares and have sold none of them.
While my words have not always been patient my actions have.
I do believe that one way or another, that by March 2016, God willing, I will be one Happy Librarian.
If the data is good, the data is good, if it's not it's not.
NWBO built a gigantic booth last year and "got no ASCO love", as you put it. So the ASCO imprimatur means little to me.
Notice that I focused on the part about "new" and "surivial" and did not really care about ASCO. I labeled the presentation by the date.
I doubt the presentation will produce a short squeeze but one can hope!
I believe this presentation will be meaningful.
If NWBO was simply doing the usual over-promising and under-delivering then they would have PR'd this presentation weeks ago since that would have provided several weeks of support and/or increase for NWBO's price as excitement built over the upcoming presentation.
Instead NWBO sat on this until less than a week before the presentation.
That tells me something else is going on and that something else is not stock price manipulation.
NWBO's May 30th Presentation includes new information about survival data collected to date and other findings."
Furthermore, "Dr. Bosch will also discuss these other findings in connection with the Company's plans for DCVax-Direct Phase II trials."
I'm trying to keep my expectations low, so as not to be disappointed but no matter how much salt I shower this in, it tastes good!
As an NWBO shareholder you're the NWBO executives' boss.
The executives do not like then, then let them take the company private.
Thus you're right to this extent:
Civility towards one's boss is a basic professional obligation.
When one's boss asks a question, it is unprofessional to ignore them.
One can answer the question, truthfully or one can "respectfully decline to answer" the question and take the consequences.
But flatly ignoring one's boss is unprofessional and the professional pride of the NWBO executives should preclude them from doing this.
I think if you were to send a letter on this premise, with your questions, you would at least get a "respectful refusal."
DoGood is right to this extent:
It might not be prudent from a business standpoint to answer basic questions. While NWBO should not get to the point that Soviet Russia did, where the Moscow phone book was reputedly a state secret, you are right that secrecy as its value.
We'll probably get data on Phase 3 during March 2016.
Given that when Ms. Powers bragged about the possibility of expanding the number of patients in the Phase 3 trial it meant NWBO was actually going to do it, I'm taking her hint of "slightly after" as a given rather than the expression of a mere possibility.
Maybe but you're assuming perfect knowledge on the part of new investors about NWBO's history of failing to meet milestones on time or even to meet them at all (whatever happened to DCVax Prostate?).
New investors who are lured to buy shares by a great press release or a news story on one of the cable business channels will simply not have that knowledge.
Remember that people who are excited about an investment usually seek information that confirms rather than undermines their investing thesis.
In that case, the same logic applies to explain why NWBO would not hire pumpers.
The risk of getting in trouble far outweighs any possible benefit.
You have half a point but you're talking out of two sides of your mouth.
You're right on one hand that we can no longer really blame the shorts.
On the other hand: If NWBO's is actually pumping then why is its share price under $10.00 when other similar stocks are much higher?
The price differential suggests that far from pumping effectively, NWBO management is doing the opposite.
To my mind there are two major reasons NWBO remains sub $10.00:
1. Poor publication of existing information about the company and its prospects which are as good or better than its peers.
2. Failure to meet any milestones in nearly a year (as you pointed out).
NWBO is unlikely to hire pumpers because, thanks to insider trading rules it is harder for the management to make money off of short term price manipulation. If their stock sales coincided with a major pump and dump, they could see the inside of a jail cell. It just isn't worth it.
Dedicated traders by contrast have every reason to maintain a cadre of fake bulletin board posters to help them engage in pumping and dumping or in shorting stocks.
So while there may be paid pumpers at work just as their are paid bashers, I doubt these folks work for NWBO.
The NWBO pumping on YMB is almost as bad.
Not that I'm undermining your point because some of these pumpers could really be shorts trying to make NWBO longs look absurd.
If you think about it, its a good strategy.
If I want to drive off serious investors, writing like a shill could be just the ticket.
How many of you would invested in NWBO if, instead of a sober looking lady like Ms. Powers or serious looking gentleman like Dr. Bosch you had a flashy carnival barker up there giving the presentations at conferences?
Well the shorts can't create a fake presentation, but thanks to the anonymity of YMB who's to say they don't create fake longs?
Typing junk like "$20.00 next week!" with no evidence takes just a few seconds so it is probably worth the effort.
In fairness, once DCVax L and Direct take flight it is possible for NWBO to refine and develop them further as well.
It's also possible that Direct will be the tech that makes L obsolete.
DCVax does not have to be a static technology.
That said, I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments on the dangers of getting complacent and taking too long to finish the trials.
A lead is only secure once the game is over.
I've seen too many football teams lose games by switching to the "prevent defense" in the 4th quarter a defense which is aptly named because it prevents you from winning.
Get 'er done, or get left in the dust.
NWBO must not become like the hare, take a break from the race and let the tortoises pass them by.
Above all they should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough.
For inoperable tumors something that works is appealing for commercialization.
Right now, patients who are this bad do not have many options.
So provided DCVax works, most people would rather pay say $100k for something that grants extension of life without side effects and maybe a cure than to pay even $60k for something that has hideous side effects, does not extend life by as much and has little to no chance to provide a cure.
Last Week Tonight had a good show criticizing the cozy relationship between doctors and pharmaceutical companies that might help explain why NWBO is having trouble breaking through.
I wouldn't expect much from ASCO but if we get something new, that would be great.
But I learned from last year where pretty much the only information I got on what was happening at NWBO's vaunted gigantic booth was from a lousy photo provided by Adam Feuerstein. You would think NWBO could have had an intern snap a few higher quality pictures and put them up on social media.
Exactly, NWBO needs an E in its P/E.
If, a very large sum is spent on an unplanned expense you don't get to simply say "Oh, sorry it's missing due to an unanticipated development."
You'd generally be expected to elaborate about that in your quarterly report especially in a context where every dollar is precious and you're saying things like:
there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
Given its dire financial position when Ms. Powers took over, I do not believe NWBO would have been able to afford fully funding its R&D without working with Cognate and offering it such favorable terms.
Should we revisit that arrangement now that times are better for NWBO?
Maybe, but until this company is out of the woods and generating revenue, it is better to let sleeping dogs lie.
As to disclosures, I think that if the Washington Post could be intimidated into backing down by Mr. Feuerstein and associates (something even Nixon couldn't manage with all the power of the Presidency) then it is not unlikely they managed the same with Ms. Powers. She learned that the more data she released the more the price got hammered.
So she's saying just enough to keep longs engaged without enough to create a story Mr. Feuerstein or others like him can respond to. She doesn't want to give them a pretext to attack and knows that they will look suspicious if they keep attacking out of the blue.
So its a standoff until she's ready with something that will hopefully wipe the shorts off the map and remove their ability to manipulate the price action.
But I am not totally dismissing your concerns. Maybe Ms. Powers might be hiding bad news at least on the completion timetables. But if it is bad news like the Phase 3 delay, remember she did a lot of telegraphing about that, signaling which, with the benefit of hindsight, was plain as day. That was why she kept mentioning about the ability to add patients to the trial. At the time I thought she was just showing how robust its design was, not hinting that she was trying to do it.
Can you or anyone see where she is sending similar signals now?
I'm glad I've held all my shares or I'd have missed out!
Given that we don't have a solid reason why it went up we don't have a solid reason it won't give this gain right back up today.
That said, I, for one, am holding my shares and not going to do any profit taking.
Even a 6% price upward movement out of nowhere should remind everyone how easy it could be to miss the big bus.
Thanks to the side bets on other biotechs I'm making with money as I earn it, I have been able to get a lot more patient with NWBO.