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.
One of the surprises in the IMUC data was that they feel pretty certain that their placebo DC's, which are not exposed to any antigens, are elevating the control group OS. Does anybody know if we are using similar DC's for our placebo here?
If so; if NWBO is using live DC's simply not exposed to the tumor lysate, and if an increase in control group OS over historical norms is observed, then the FDA and EMA should take that into consideration.
For such a response to be observed in just one trial would have X weight. But for such a response to be observed in two competing trials should have 4X weight. Ie, it becomes 4 times as credible that the effect is real, and crosses the threshold into irresponsible to ignore.
Let's just hope it is not too good an effect, or this whole antigen thing is a waste of $ and time. It would bode well for Direct, however.
But why the hell do they use live DC's as the placebo? Are they afraid patients are going to go home after injection and put their band-aids under a microscope to see if they see DC's, live DC's? No... It must be to prevent clinicians from doing similar to find out if a given treatment/patient is control or experimental group. What a shame that they would have to go to such lengths, but kind of impressive that they go to such lengths to prevent tampering with the trial.
Maybe somebody could private message George. I don't know how often he checks back here. Given his apparent role, it was certainly a mistake. Very likely pre-R/S numbers as you suggest. I have seen such on some charts... prehaps still off in some data logs too. Recall PDTrdr making similar errors recently. Maybe they are looking at the same trade registers.
I can only post once a day... so in case Xena reads this... Sometimes I am not sure if your trading tallies are for blocks or shares. Sometimes you state it explicitly, sometimes you expect us to know. I never know.
The third stooge is getting a little more press today.
Dear SmithOnStocks Subscriber,
A new blog titled "KaloBios: The Fascinating Story of the Takeover of the Company by Martin Shkreli and Hedge Fund Friends (KBIO, $18.25, I would not touch this stock)" has been posted on SmithOnStocks.com. You can view this article at http://smithonstocks.com/kalobios-the-fascinating-story-of-the-takeover-of-the-company-by-martin-shkreli-and-hedge-fund-friends-kbio-18-25-i-would-not-touch-this-stock/.
CLDX Data. Nobody talking about the IMUC Phase-2 follow-up data today? The stock tanked, but the data looked pretty good to me, within their recently narrowed subgroup targets.
For the proper genetic line, and for patients that respond to temador (mysenchimal mysenthropal non-mysnechymal) (whatever) it had pretty decent results.
To me, it bodes well for DCVax-L, for patients that respond to (now generic) Temador.
They concluded that they are going to include the patients that don't respond to Temador in their upcoming Phase 3 trial because that factor had no effect on the degree of immune response... which made absolutely no sense to say. The fact that they would say something that made no sense did concern me.
Recall that NWBO defined a very large number of subgroups at some point. Given that fact, I don't see how a failure could be likely. A partial failure seems somewhat likely. A complete failure... seems very very unlikely.
Mushy-Logic
The mush-mellon vs the steel-traps. I think I've got em!!!!!!! No way out!
I therefore predict no bad news Monday morning!
I have a lot of respect for you CBD, and there may be some value to this post, but any article that promotes the use of LSD for spiritual gain without adding major caviats is, in my view, improper.
Thirty five years ago I lost a friend who went overboard with recreational drugs in the riptide between the momentum of the war machine and the complete rejection by people of draft age, of all things associated with war. Greg was probably a year too young to get drafted, but he was enveloped in the resulting culture, that lasted for many years after the Vietnam war.
His demise probably had as much to do with the excess use of amphetamines as it did with his use of LSD, but I am certain that LSD contributed. There is a special kind of burn-out that can result from the use of LSD, that can be extremely painful, psychologically, and some people do not pull a Robert Downey Jr. miracle and come out the other side unscathed.
Many users of LSD experience something very special, spiritually, ie the experience of living truely in the moment. But I believe, while knowing that such exists is a good thing, not doing LSD is an important part of a life plan to reach existence in the moment. The burnout puts people so far from where they were trying to go. It isn't having been there, it is being there, and LSD puts you farther from being there than you were before. No big surprise, that is generally how such things work.
Maybe in the proper group setting the net can be a gain. And such supportive groups do naturally form, sometimes, outside of a clinical setting. But for every person that benefits in such a supportive environment there are many more that end up twisted or burned out with little lasting positive from the experience.
LSD is an extremely powerful drug, and even Timothy Leary stated that it was not for everyone. Of course he had to put that in the form of a put-down, stating, "You don't put jet fuel in a Volkswagon brain". But I don't think it is that simple. I think that was an arrogant and irresponsible thing to say.
Looking back at my friend Greg's life... he was literally the best person I have ever known. Thirty five years later, I still think about him every day, and what I should have done to help him out of the incredible depth of depression that followed his brief era of excessive use of speed and LSD.
It is a certainty that Cramer and Feuerstein want NWBO dead. Whether anyone in big pharma thinks like that... I would think so, but I respect your statement that such is not inline with your experience.
However, Feuerstein and Cramer, and the new arshlo on the block, Martin Shkreli, represent the interests of associated hedge funds. Those hedge funds have big pharma holdings that would be threatened by any major change to the Oncology sector. If Northwest is successful, there will be a very large upheavel in the oncology sector. Period. I thought I heard Feuerstein recently quoted as saying as much, but cannot find that quote.
I'm trying to think of examples where Cramer or Feuerstein were clearly attacking NWBO to protect a holding... and the only one that immediately comes to mind is Celldex. And Celldex is not truely big pharma, it is medium pharma. So... I will keep my ears open for further examples...
But Feuerstein is coached by an MD with direct ties to big pharma. I don't remember the details, but I will track those down if you are interested.
The SEC presumably tolerates Feuerstein and the like because there is a need for balance in this sector due to excessive pumping of stocks at the expense of retail. But I don't believe that is really a major consideration. Look at the AEZS death spiral magic B warrants deal that went down a few months ago. That totally crooked deal handed 90% of retail's shares to the institutions using a convoluted contract intended to delay retails realization of the true nature. In fact it was many weeks before the broader retail realized what had happened. By that time it was too late. And there was not one word from the great protectors of retail, Feuerstein and Cramer. No, they are crooks, just as Cramer confessed. They are working in the interest of associated hedge funds, and in that work, they attack any threat to their big pharma holdings. So... it may not be big pharma per-se... maybe that is where we may not dissagree here.
And those crooks dominate the retail small biocap space. Why should two men. An admitted securities criminal and his flunkie, be allowed to dominate something as valuable as the small-cap biotech space. Like the rain forests, a major source of new drugs... yet people rally to protect the rain forests, but there is no rally to protect small-cap biotech.
Mr. Schnauzer,
Everybody knew about this arrangement when the FDA and the Europeans aligned the trial plans. Either both regulators are willing to judge the confirmatory on PFS, or it is believed that the crossing over, while giving some hope, does not elevate the control arm OS enough to destroy the chances of full approval based on OS. It must be one or the other.
At least... that is my guess. Do you think the FDA and the EMA would maintain different ultimate approval criteria?
What if DCVax-L is approved in Europe and not the US? How many Americans could afford to fly to the UK, or Germany for the treatment.
More likely the UK since less stress, being the same language. That would take quite the infastructure in the UK, if many Americans were to fly over... Quite the infastructure.
What value $NWBO if European approval only. Note that even European approval likely ensures enough income to accelerate plans for DCVax-Direct, which is worth 10 fold what DCVax-L is worth by most people's estimates.
Tertiary Lymphoid Structures. Good stuff! Back in the day (iHub, here, 1 1/2 years ago?) I remember debating the question of whether the TCells could replicate locally at the tumor, possibly using the destroyed tumor cells as food for replication. That would short circuit what would appear to be a very long loop that includes both DC and T Cell travel.
These local lymph nodes would accomplish about the same thing. I wonder if they feed on the tumor. Certainly indirectly, as the body is unlikely to waste any food, but I wonder if the local lymph nodes get the lion's share of the spoils, directly.
Will have to read the full article and see if they got into that question.
These small biotechs seem to all have action at the same time. Maybe they are located so near each other in the New England area that the pheromone's sync them.
This makes it difficult to play more than one at a time. I was on the outside debating entry after hours yesterday. But it ran so hard after hours that I was hesitant. Went to bed worried about entry this morning.
On the west coast, I get up between 4AM and 4:15AM every morning. Even weekends sometimes out of habit. Today, woke up at 6:05AM to this great news. I guess I should be happy to have re-entry below $4. But some of my powder was not dry... my bad.
Once it is clear that AF cannot turn this golden news to dirt, as is his forte', it will continue up.
Very early, PR. Unusual. Maybe intended to get a big run-up flag waving so the hedge funds would have to compete with true buyers to cover after opening bell.
AF tweeted as if Anavex's PR'd negotiations had been with some other country. I tweeted him and let him know that the FDA is a US regulatory body. So now that he is fully informed I am sure he will soon be tweeting about what a deal $AVXL is at the current valuation.
Thanks Sentiment. I only heard about Bosch's comments about Direct. As nice as those comments were, hearing good things about L is a little more reassuring at the moment.
Very good point. Another big concern / risk mitigated.
Flipper: I didn't miss your point that the recent SEC filings state that feeding docs to the regulators is ongoing, which is something I missed or ignored in my reasoning. The docs also explain that site expansion is continuing because more sites are needed whether they are to be used to continue the trial or treat paying patients. ...that site preparation requires the same tasks either way.
I agree that nothing in those statements favors a continue over an early approval.
And as to timing, I yield to the criticisms posted that to assume that the shelf registration means an imminent need for shares, let alone an imminent positive need, makes no sense. I have just been on pins and needles, worried that I won't make it back into NWBO in time for the next event. An event I decided some time ago to participate in / ride through. Nothing much happening lately, so this SEC filing registered on the Richter scale in the background calm. But, as is apparent to some, I don't know much about the financials and likely read the significance of this recent SEC filing incorrectly.
But that doesn't mean they won't announce German reimbursement on Monday. It just means that the registration is not a flag that anything is imminent. And the description of ongoing doc submittals to regulators suggests to the contrary, that any such news is not super imminent. ...unless fewer docs are required by the Germans for determining reimbursement than are required by whoever to determine efficacy as it pertains to trial continuation status. It does seem unlikely, however, that the Germans would make their own determination of efficacy if a broader consensus, involving more data, was only days or weeks away.
Pyrhonian's recent analysis does scare me. He is one sharp dude. But...
1) Though he seems sincere, he has warned repeatedly that he is a player.
2) He does not seem to be allowing for any difference in efficacy between NWBO's techniques, and the techniques used in the clinical he describes. NWBO has claimed that fine details make a big difference in outcome. Just the teenage DC's presumably being a very large efficacy difference on their own. And NWBO has an enormous number of patents for such details in the DC space.
Hooper: Would you please explain this beautiful efficacy chart for AVXL 2-73/Plus. (link below). If not familiar with this chart, please let me/us know and I/we can provide a cluster of chart links all from the guy that generate this chart... not sure his role here other than his apparent crunching of new data from Barcelona.
The text underneath the chart seems to say that the data for 2-73 includes data from MMSE converted to ADAS-Cog. I actually don't remember exactly what either are, but in my vague recollection... I don't remember such tests being interchangeable. Anyway it seems strange and will seem strange to everyone that is not super informed. My guess is that they are indeed interchangeable... but it is not reasonable for me or anyone else to just assume that as we admire the chart.
This chart looks amazing. Super important because it extends out linearily past the point where RVT-101 efficacy has started to wane. But unfortunately, it is very unclear, at least to me, just what the chart is showing.
I assume the early data points for 2-73 include more patients than the later data. In fact, as far as we know, the 18 week data point could be a single patient.
Further, would you please verify that from your understanding, we remain practically blinded as to which patients are taking Donepezil in addition to 2-73, other than knowing that overall, in the end, there will have been 75% with Donepezil, and 25% without.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTelu1cWsAA19YZ.jpg
Aside:
My understanding was that a significant portion of alcohol removal from the blood stream came from evaporation in the lungs. In fact, I believe breathing increases as part of the mechanism to expel alcohol, and that the elevated oxygen levels in the blood that result are part of the alcohol high. This elevated breathing adds to a diuretic effect resulting in dehydration, which feeds back to reduce breathing. So that drinking some water with your booze likely increases your buzz, but costs you more drinks. A question perhaps more properly directed to bourbononmycornflakes.yahoo.message.board.
Oh... my question to you regarding alcohol... If evaporation in the lungs is a substantial contributor to the elimination of alcohol, then wouldn't there be at least a second order dependance of elimination rate on blood concentration? Certainly the rate of evaporation is dependant on blood concentration.
Anavex will likely be bought out in less than 2 years at a small fraction of what it is worth, because two men with no bio background whatsoever have taken the roll of deciding what market cap each emerging biotech shall be able to maintain. Cramer, Feuestein, and Feuerstein-II / Martin Shkreli are in nearly complete control, using the highly illegal tactics that you blow-off by saying, "Who gives a f---k".
If you add Feuerstein's widely publicised and circulated "Thesis" (his BA Thesis?) which states that emerging biotechs with less than $300M market caps are doomed to fail, then these men are not just controlling how easy life will be for emerging biotechs, but whether they will survive at all. On the verge of collapse, these companies either get aquired on the cheap by the big pharma's in these men's hedge funds / associates' hedge funds, or they die and their threat of competition is gone.
Anavex is absolutely a major threat to Axon. Just as NWBO is a major threat to Celldex, one of Jim Cramer's darlings. If you examine Cramer's recommendations and the holdings in his associate's hedge funds, as well as the holding's in Martin Shrikeli's hedge fund, I am willing to bet that Axon is a major holding.
Two or three men, tightly connected. Feuerstein's first job in the Biotech Arena was working for Cramer as a "Biotech Reporter". Martin Shkreli's first job period, was working for four years as an intern at Cramer's hedge fund. They both learned from the master. The master of what? According to Cramer, among other things, the master of stock price manipulation via circulation of damaging, false rumors, when it serves the hedge fund's purposes. Cramer is an admitted big time securities crook who managed to escape prison and land a job as the most widely watched stock advisor on the planet, because he has connections to people in positions of power.
Anavex was getting overhyped, and whoever drove the Agora Financial article should be fired or shot... but the fact is, there is no real reason to believe that Anavex had anything to do with that. As a long investor, I have watched CEO Missling in his interviews and conference webcasts, and I have consistently witnessed him understate expectations of efficacy. His standard line is that we just have to go through the trials and wait and see.
That said, I have to back off from saying how impressed I am with the recently circulated chart showing impressive efficacy for Anavex 2-73 Plus (75% Plus, 25% w/o adjunct generic) through 16 or 18 weeks. I don't understand the chart. My knee jerk was to be very impressed, and I put on the back burner trying to understand the textual explanations under the chart... but after three brief tries, I admit, I have no idea what that chart is showing. It is very impressive, but what is it? It's frankendata. A mix of data from different tests? I don't think it is in the best interest of the company to circulate an impressive looking chart that is so confusing. But I don't think Anavex did cirulate the chart. I am confused about all that. Looks like a technical individual put that together, and it might be very meaningful, but I shouldn't say that it is, because, I don't understand it.
The chart is very important because the criticism that 5 week data is not super meaningfull is a legitimate criticism. It is wonderful that the 5 week data looks good, but the critics are right that 10 cups of coffee, or maybe 3, might have good results at 5 weeks. But not at 18 weeks. There would be burnout by 18 weeks. Certainly not a consistent, continuing increase in efficacy, as that frankenchart showed. So... I agree that the 24 week data (or 26) is super important, and that the proper SP/cap is difficult to determine until then, but I don't agree that it is Cramer, Feuerstein, and Skreli's right to set that $Value using their tremendous reach and outright lies. That is flatly illegal and should be dealt with as such. Those three people people are fkng nobody!
Maybe such big things happening that they can't worry about such side effects as short sited retail response. Just have to focus on their big moves and not sweat the details.
Any news to soften the knee jerk response could jeopardize the trials. Not worth the smallest risk with the gold ring in their grasp.
I read it as immenent good news... but that wouldn't necessarily be true in retrospect. I thought, with recent financing of half their usual, though a tad late, should hold them longer than this. So must be in response to a catalyst.
However, in retrospect, it would make little sense to wait until such a catalyst. Then there might not be time. But you don't want to do the registration too early. Too soon after recent financing is just too much finance talk in a short period of time. So you wait, but as you wait, you worry that you might wait too long, and have the catalyst in your lap. So... you pull the trigger a little sooner after last financing than you would like... but before the likely catalyst.
Or... you waited too long and now you are rushed. 4 days to PR any such catalyst. But you get the registration done in time anyway? The S-3 says it is not complete yet... I think.
Alz: Pigs get fat, and me... I was the next in that story, sort of. Made about 4X on the down side of 7X, but was really only 2X because I was foolish enough to step into that aezs death-spiral side-show during an apparent lull in Alz land. Took me 3 days to unravel their riddle which had an exploding turd in the middle. One day too late. Got out with only losing 1 leg. 2X isn't bad, but what coulda-been ahhhhh! Good for you that you were smarter.
How about just one more hint Maverick. Are you saying this foreshadows something good for longs, or something bad? My guess is you are saying something good, but I really don't want to guess.
You think it will be a 24 week update, not a 26 week update? I have been wondering. 26 weeks matches their original planned 6 months, while 24 weeks allows a head to head comparison to Axon's data. Maybe they will wait long enough to provide both numbers?
Further, did you (or anybody) see a p number for the AB 12 week data, and is there reason to believe "statistical significance" could be reached at 24 or 26 weeks? Clearly, from one of the graphs that I saw, the efficacy projects to be incredible... but I don't have a feel for how many patients are required for even great efficacy, to reach "statistical significance".
Are they required to announce a continue?
If the look was officially for efficacy for German reimbursement, and the bonus was a decision on continue, etc, etc... would they have to announce a recommendation of continue?
The fewest ripples for the patients' psyches would be to say nothing at all.
Nothing to be sorry about Sentiment. I did deserve it.
It was a private message over a year ago. I deserved it. I had jumped down somebody's throat. But you were pretty brutal.
"Or they just need more shares because they have run out from all of the dilution? The shares can be used to pay Cognate and raise through PP. Pretty typical and they have done it before WITHOUT any catalyst or good news."
I don't know enough to say that isn't their reason. It does scare me a little. But what certainly fits as well is that they have good news, and want to fund the lauch of their Phase 2 Direct trial with that news.
I didn't read all of that from the S-3, just the continue, and the timing. My guess from day 1 has been that the hold was for an efficacy look to serve 2 purposes.
1) German Reimbursement amount... if any.
2) Continue, Terminate, or Early Approval (whatever the correct term is).
They stopped when they had 300 enrolled / randomized, right? That was the original full enrollment plan. Ie, that was the required enrollment to reach statistical significance if the efficacy was what they had originally targeted / hoped for. They wanted to take a look there for possible early (original plan on-time) termination, and that allowed the German reimursement look at the same time without whatever that additional statistical bias expense is for the trial. Really the same look. Probably planned long ago.
If it was early termination with a confirmatory, I don't think they would have worded their reasons for continued site expansion the way that they did.
Or... not.
Thank you Sentiment. I didn't leave because of your scolding for being a jerk. I was just out of money... or low enough to want to gamble in higher risk stocks to work my way back.
Not that NW is my sole interest, but ever since leaving I have constantly kept track of how many shares of NWBO I could trade my stake for, with the goal of getting it all back someday. $NWBO is my native currency.
Thank you Flipper. I had gotten down to 6% of my original shares somehow. So I went out and worked and gambled my way back up to 23%. Was closing in on 100% to 300% a week ago, when the usual suspect pulled the rug out from under my feet, and then NW went and pulled this... instead of pleasing Foxhound and myself by dipping deeply next Friday, on schedule. smiley face.
Good luck on that $3 entry Foxhound.
They just financed, so this filing must be preparation for a major catalyst. At least, that is how I am reading it. I think that Catalyst is a continue on DCVax-L as well as the initiation of German Reimbursement at an agreed $ rate based on the efficacy observed during the hold.
I guess the other possibility is that they have very bad news and so they want to fund before the news... I placed my bet. I am all-in, though I am not leveraged.
I'm all in as of a few minutes ago. Here is why: Wanted to wait for an expected dip late next week, and have been planning on being back in for a long time, but the registration and other information in the filings today tell me I am out of time.
In my opinion, allowing that I'm not as sharp as many on this board... I have believed from the beginning that the reasons for the hold are:
1) To see if the trial can continue as confirmatory to 6 months (PFS or OS? I have forgotten).
2) To allow the Germans a look at efficacy and finally make a reimbursement $ amount decision. I don't know if those $ decisions are in stone, or if they get modified as more data comes in, but either way, it means money coming in, and possibly a backlog of $ owed from previous treatments, as I believe Flipper has been saying, and probably many others. That sum up front could be substantial. I know that many of you will have a very good guess as to those details. But I have not been following closely lately.
I believe they will be announcing the German reimbursement decision within 4 (trading) days... probably within 4 days of yesterday, but possibly within 4 days of today. Along with that will come an announcement of either a continue, or an early approval with confirmatory. Based on the details of the wording of the S-3 filing, I think it is a continue.
Some might be able to infer the efficacy from the $ amount decided for reimbursement, if that $ amount becomes public.
If the efficacy is 5 months (OS or PFS?)... then DCVax-L is not as good as many thought. But the company has learned a great deal over the many years in the trial, and not all that they have learned would have been allowed into trial changes. Yet after approval, MD's can make tweaks on there own. At least that is my understanding. They can make minor tweaks to the DCVax-L application, but also to the radiation and chemo. Northwest has developed markers to predict the efficacy. Those markers might be useful as feedback to tell the MD's when radiation or chemo has reached the point of too much of a sort of good thing. Maybe that is before they start... but probably not.
It is a new era. The efficacy will go up from whatever the trial yields. That is a near certainty. And as preliminary genetic testing becomes standard, and other adjuncts get developed, those improvements will continue to grow, until DCVax-l gets replaced altogether with DCVax-Direct. Maybe never for GBM, and only GBM, but probably, eventually, for GBM also.
As long as the income from DCVax-L is substantial compared to combined trial costs, the investment becomes so derisked that the eventuality of DCVax-Direct becomes something to embrace now. Maybe. Sort of. And I'm stickin to it! Maybe, sort of, is as far as I back-peddle.
Agreed. Beautiful! Add the patient comments today, the 3 or 4 day lag I have observed in response to large conference presentations... and what a difference a day makes!
Obviously there is a decent chance that this drug, Anavex 2-73, will prove out.
(Decent Chance) X (One of the largest markets in the pharma space) X (not an expensive therapy, just a pill) =
Gauruntee that Jim Cramer, his henchman Adam Feuerstein, and the likes of Martin Shkreli, will hammer the stock, regardless of the true value. Note that Martin Shkreli used to work for Cramer's former hedge fund.
My speculation above is not arbitrary. Adam Feuerstein has a BA in Political Science, and had no biotech background whatsoever when Jim Cramer hired him to work for him as a Biotech Reporter. Jim Cramer soon started qualifying everything that Feuerstein said as having come from a "Biotech Expert". Feuerstein's primary council is in fact a Doctor... but a Doctor that likely leans toward big pharma, given his direct ties. While statements from that Doctor would be considered potentially biased, coming from Feuerstein, the connection to Big Pharma dissappears, but is really only 1 layer deep, while Feuerstein can hide behind the first ammendment.
Feuerstein has made statements in the past that clearly communicate his working philosophy that the large Pharma's essentially have the rights to anything developed by small biotechs, with a small premium. So retail carries these high risk small cap biotechs until the egg does appear golden, then Feurstein, Cramer, and other known crooks like Cramer, hammer the companies down to a price more to the liking of large intitutional investors and or prespective purchasers in the Big Pharma realm. It's a two-fer. Coordinated trashing of promising biotechs means money on the way down, and money later on, after their associates hedge fund(s)' large pharma holdings reep the benefits that retail thought they had paid for.
I predict that this issue, with a clear history of gross abuse and gross negligence of inaction by the SEC will become another key topic in the continued presidential debates in the near future.
Perhaps your 15 minutes of fame is yet to come Mr. Fonteneau.
I agree. The enormous negative energy dumped into this stock would likely be due to the drug (believed) being too expensive or too much of a hastle for Big Pharma to produce... yet a threat, or it being a drug that BP wants, badly.
I don't think the competition with other Alzheimer's drugs alone would generate this much... what did Cramer call it? Fomenting. This much fomenting and volume.
As far as I know, this is not a difficult nor expensive drug to mfg... It's just a pill. BP's favorite drug type.
Who is Adam Feuerstein?
Several year ago Jim Cramer hired Adam Feuerstein to work for him as a "Biotech Reporter". Very soon after, Cramer started referring to Feuerstein as a "Biotech Expert". In fact that brief period working for Jim Cramer was the entirety of Adam Feuerstein's experience in Biotech.
And who is Jim Cramer? Jim Cramer was half owner of a hedge fund for many years. In an infamous videotape that you can find on utub Cramer admits to illegal practices to manipulate share price if the hedge fund got in trouble having setup highly leveraged short bets that went wrong.
A common strategy by hedge funds is to short all small cap biotechs. The chances of failure are high, so statistically, they win. The problem is that they leverage these bets 30 or even 50 fold. So if they lose, they lose 50X an already unlimited potential amount. That sets in panic. According to Cramer, what they do in those panic situations is disseminate completely false information to temporarily effect a drop in share price in order to cover their short bets. In the same video, Cramer said that it is important to have access to people in the public eye at CNBC in order to accomplish such manipulation.
After Cramer's infamous revelation, an action was started against Cramer by an officer at the SEC. The action was later shut-down by the head of the SEC, with no explanation. Cramer, instead of going to prison, ended up with his own show on CNBC, as you know.
Round 1: Missling (aka Demian (Hesse's)) Vs Adam Feuerstein et al (aka @&$mt&hr!#f*kr!s#*?#;). Tomorrow, 9:28AM EST. May the better man win.
I am not savy enough to digest the sigificance of the data so far... but I can consider these things:
As a Biomed Ph.D. / professional biotech investment advisor, flown to Spain for this event, Edny Inui definitely has no interest in hyping our stock, yet net-net she said,
"I'm a conservative scientist type, #s are way too small and P300 signal unproven but def no reason NOT to move fwd"
I think that "definitely" is the most important take-away from everything that she said. You can read the above statement as positive to extremely positive.
Clearly, compared to the larger trials underway, the number of patients here is not very impressive and has to be part of her commenting. That is why she kept saying not statistically significant.
Missling's plan is to get a partner for the heavy hauling with a larger patient population. What he has done is get a glimpse of the efficacy with this smaller patient group, within budget, yet with enough patients to draw interest for a partner. We will see if he was successful... but a credible biotech investment advisor says, "def[url][/url][tag]insert-text-here[/tag] no reason NOT to move fwd". She is going to be communicating that to the planet of potential partners.
Believe her, or believe someone who calls themselves "Dark Force". Now why would you call yourself "Dark Force". To scare people. Did he come up with that name after reviewing this data? I don't think so. He/she/it appears to be a professional negative. Who will the tutes and whales be listening to?
@HB36265384 I'm a conservative scientist type, #s are way too small and P300 signal unproven but def no reason NOT to move fwd #ctad2015
— Edny Inui (@DoctorEdny) November 7, 2015
Thanks for the Reminder about the Schedule. That is ideal, if Anavex has very good results, as most of us longs expect. The relative performance vs the relative market caps. That is as good a situation as we could hope for. If we are better, we will stand out. As fair as you can get.
"Share Consolidation" is the previously PR'd R/S, as you know. So, you are clearly a manipulator. This person should be put on ignore.
Obligated to correct my numbers regarding the recent arrangement for share sales option.
Twice now I have posted on the topic and made errors in the numbers. The SEC filing isn't very complicated, so I am embarrased. Other correct assesments were posted, but nobody specifically pointed out my errors. Polite I guess.
I said Missling was a genius in business, I didn't say I was.
Still see the deal was very smart. But Missling did pay quite a bit for the freedom of control of the funding. I see the value of that control at this point in the growth of the company as invaluable. So, I still think it was a great deal.
Rather than 90% efficient funding, it is more like 81%, if they sell all the shares, when you take into account the up front payment and subsequent bonus payment. Still, that compares pretty well to 65% efficient for the first small cap biotech I pulled up in a search. And that biotech did not get control of the funding rate as part of the deal.
Maybe the plan is as simple as "get funds when you can"... but even if that was the case, there are clearly side benefits. One is very fast control of OS in case of a hostile takeover if super good data is announced. Another would be the ability to negotiate a partnership. A partner might offer to match, X-fold, funds for a P3. Avanex might have to come up with a fair amount of money as their part of the deal, up front, and they probably want to be able to say with confidence that such would not be a problem.
With a small float, Missling needs to be careful how he moves. This gives him that fine and fast control. This beast's motor (Anavex 2-73 etc) might be very powerful, but this deal gives it a (running) Jaguar's transmission and a BMW's suspension to boot. Well worth the price.
In Missling I trust to control even sharks. The truth is Missling is not an MD, he is a Ph.D.. He is a business man. A really gifted business man.
This deal does have a minor resemblance to some of the recent toxic deals I have seen, but it is truely a minor resemblance. The fact that the deal is done in $ instead of shares, and Lincoln gets shares at a 10% discount would setup a spiral down if Lincoln were just handed all the shares and let loose. Though the slope is very low, and there would be benefit to Lincoln to dump all at once. They would make less money. Perhaps most important, Missling would have no reason to do that. The whole point of the deal is that he can squeeze out shares when he wants, at the rate he wants, if he wants.
1) The 10% is a very low slope.
2) Missling stays in complete control of the release of shares.
10% is a very small discount. I looked at a recent deal by another popular small cap. The underwriter got 5%, and the investors got; the stock at a 27% discount to the RSP (my term "Recent Share Price") + 1/2 again warrants with an excercise price that was a 10% discount on the RSP. In comparison, this deal with Lincoln is squeeky clean! And that other biotech just did the deal as one big block, with the investors free to do whatever they want with the shares and warrants, whenever they want.
Basically, that other biotech gave a 30% discount to the investors and paid a 5% fee to the underwriter on top of that. All in all, only 65% efficient and no control whatsoever to how and when the shares got sold. Compare that to 100% control and a 90% efficiency that Missling set up. He's a frkn genius, and he must also have something that Lincoln likes.
Feurstein's job is to keep the price of small cap biotechs low so that Big Pharma can aquire them more easily at the point they feel satisfied that the risk is minimal. It is retail's job to take the high risk early on.
You have to understand that wealthy people don't take big risks. And people that are not super wealthy don't need money. If they want to gamble it away on risky biotechs, or buy lotto tickets at the local liquor store, then so be it. As long as they hand the lotto ticket (or small cap gem) over to the wealthy people if they get undeservedly lucky.
The deal with LP is all in the hands of Anavex. It is like having $100M already underwritten, but not executed. To be executed at the discretion of Anavex without all the headaches of dealing with some sleazy underwriter.
The magnitude of the deal is pretty large compared to today's market cap, but this stock is probably going to a cap of $800M to $1.67B very soon. The deal with LP puts a limit of $40/sh for Lincoln park. They can't be forced to buy above that price. That's $1.67B. Lincoln probably insisted on the cap after proper DD indicating the potential near term changes in SP.
Even if the stock only went to an $800M cap corresponding to approximately $19/share, a $100M dilution would only be an 11% dilution. And if the SP goes to $30, such a dilution would only be 7.5%. A noose hanging over investors heads? What an exaggeration! And the money goes back into the company. It's not like it evaporates.
And that is if they executed the entire $100M. It's optional!
It is rare to see a deal without matching warrants. And recently I have been seeing cloaked (in multi layers of bs) magic warrants that multiply as the stock price drops. None of that here. Just like their Share Data tab at the company website... all above board, all totally rationale, all good business.
Maybe that will change someday, but I have to go with how the company has handled itself so far. Compared to that, your input is an annoying little squeak in the background noise.
Not disagreeing with anybody's analysis here, but based on the little experience I have debating these issues for Oncology stocks posting abstracts prior to presentations at ASCO, my guess was that the conference people objected to letting out that much information prior to the conference.
My recollection is that the conference people restrict such in their rules, not because of any regulatory constraints, but just because they want to keep as much mystique as possible going into the conference. They want people to buy tickets.
Inconsistent with that is the need to PR the news anyway, at least prior to market open, if not prior to the presentation, if there is no webcast. And there is usually no webcast at such large conferences. Still, if the PR of the data is after the conference but before market open, at least attendees have a couple more days to digest the info. Not sure that is allowed. I don't remember if such a PR would come Friday, after hours (before the Saturday presentation), or Monday, after the presentation. What would actually make the most sense would be to run the PR on Saturday, just after the presentation ends. That would be the most fair, but... I don't remember that happening in previous cases.
Also inconsistent with my guess above is that it seems unlikely the conference staff would let that through if it was against policy. I am sure they review those presentation titles carefully. But, maybe they screwed up.
At any rate, I hope they did not violate any regulatory rules, and my bet is that it was not a retraction due to a change in data.
(I get one post per day these days) So signing off.
An offering would make no sense. Are you aware that there are warrants still out there? You appear to be unaware of that, yet you write as if you are an expert.
There could be a plan to offload all the remaining warrants at the uplist, before the news. That would allow an even better response from the news. But why do an offering when you have half the warrants left from your last offering? They have enough money for what they want to do in the forseeable future, and more money coming in soon from the outstanding warrants.
So an offering would make no sense, yet you say, "There will ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY be an offering before any data release.".
You make no sense.
THEY MUST REALLY LIKE OUR PEACHES!
But they must be Space Cowboys if they think that shaking this tree again is gonna loosen my shares!