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.
wondering if you could explain what a genetic makeover is?
You're 100% right. There is no business value to pure spider silk, and what would pure spider silk be? The silk of a tarantula is very different than that of an orb weaver. If we made 100% tarantula silk, nobody would want it.
The value is in the properties of the silk, full stop. Pure spider silk is a gimmick, and not one that KBLB is pursuing, perhaps outside of a purely academic sense which wouldn't fall under the business side, but Dr. Fraser's lab side.
Short Version: Folks need to stop talking about pure spider silk, as it just shows that their vision is far too limited.
and thats assuming that the vaunted university of notre dame would consent to allow credits credits be passed on to their students for cleaning up worm crap...
pnas?...you mean that fraud riddled publication?
why not use a hagfish
Nor did I, for the record.
I'm saying this was a good move by Kim! He (as you like to remind us) is the only one that knows what's coming down the pipeline. This hire says more to me than many 2014 PRs because it shows that Kim thinks the time is really NOW.
120K a year is no joke. This person has commercialization experience in an engineering field for goodness sake! This is all I was saying over the weekend is that KBLB could use someone to focus on sales. I'm pumped!
I'm quite pleased by this hire. It shows that Kim realizes where he could use help. Great CEO move!
What a move that would be! Mid-day PR, chaos on Pink Street! That's the Mark Cuban spirit I'm looking for haha
This being from August 2012 seems to lend more credence to the 'Overpromise, Underdeliver' theme. It reads like it's all right around the corner and only now through hindsight can we see how misleading the tone was, unless the goal was unabashed enthusiasm?
I hope that the next PR answers all these unanswered questions from 2012, but based on some (but of course not all) of the PRs from 2013 and 2014, I think we're still not where Kim thought we would be at the end of 2013 based on the tone of that letter.
In the spirit of completeness I should add that reading that letter got me excited again, but I'm currently in a once bitten twice shy situation. When I read that letter I picture Kim in a little dinghy navigating rough waters. Now, it seems like someone gave the dinghy captain the keys to a freightliner.
I greatly hope you're right though and Kim can steer the ship back to where he was aiming his dinghy 2.5 years ago.
Have we ever discussed the fate of Kim's first start-up? If so, I don't recall that. I never looked into it, but I doubt it was anything like a biotech startup (research personnel, international textiles , etc). I have a science-based non-profit, but that wouldn't make me any more qualified to run Habitat for Humanity. (if not a bit hyperbolic)
In regards your goalpost comment, I said:
experience in litigation with respect to start ups.
I think that question is fruitless because you and I fundamentally disagree on what constitutes a worthwhile PR. I'd hate to take the time on something as subjective. It seems like a bit of a dead end and I don't want to waste your time or mine.
Phrased another way, that's a rabbit hole I don't want to go down. I commented on the most egregious at the time (New Website, Awards we didn't attend). Progress-giving PRs were just more secretive than seemed necessary. I didn't come away with a sense of progress but more of time passing. It's subjective, let's talk, not attack.
I definitely did. Feel free to check PR dates and my posts.
I know about communicating goal and achievements to those that deserve it is the way you build up clout in any arena. Kim's PRs would be indistinguishable from that of any P+D. I know KBLB is not, but the PRs may as well be from any pinky biotech stock.
Meat on the bones when you talk, meeting self-imposed deadlines, and explaining why you didn't if they're missed (and that shouldn't be the RULE). That's all i, or any of us, should as k from someone we invest our time or money with. True at my job, I'd bet it's true at all of yours too. Why not Kim's?
As a side note: Felt it was prudent to note that I'm trying to be argumentative. If you're not interested in talking to me, that's fine. I'm just trying to shoot the stuff while we wait, and these are my BIGGEST concerns, which is why I invest here with confidence.
I guess all I'm saying is that if you walk down the hallway of any R1 research institution, you'd find a sizeable percentage that would qualify for (and potentially more telling is the fact that they would never apply to) the 999. It's not a catch-all to make Kim semi-omnicient.
It's clearky good that he's smart, but there were times in 2014 I'd almost rather he leave smart to Malcom and that he'd be more Mark Cuban and less litigious when he communicates with the shareholders and public.
All that text tells me he's a good lawyer that has experience in litigation with respect to start ups. Where in that wall of text does it suggest he should take a biotech to commercialization with his skills? I'd love if he were the KBLB attorney, but unfortunately he splits those pants with CEO, CFO, and any other O other than science advisor.
I couldn't run a biotech company, I'd be a science guy. I'm not saying I can do it better. With all that experience, why do we need CSC?
I have the ACT score and GRE score that qualify for 9-9-9 society, for what it's worth (which I think is nothing). It's not as if they pluck students from orphanages if their aptitude test reads "Genius". It's a club you sign up for and pay $10/year for access to some message boards and for a CV line.
http://www.triplenine.org/main/admission.asp
Kim is smart. Kim knows enough about the biology to run KBLB with Fraser over the scope. I think Kim's biggest fault is his lack of startup business savvy. If you let me manage a 90s baseball team with Mark McGuire, I'd manage myself a home run or two, but I'd probably muck up the pitching situation.
I'll always give Fraser the bulk of the credit for the success of future KBLB. Kim was smart enough to find a good thing, and in my opinion, is mostly still coasting off of just how good a thing he found. So much potential, I hope it can be reached soon.
We're in agreement, except I'm just a little more optimistic at the end of the day. I agree completely that we could be further along than we are now if Kim had realized his limitations earlier and hired a CFO or something to that end three years ago.
It seems to me that all KBLB needs is some fire under their keesters. Kim doesn't have to answer to anyone these days if his performance is not progressing at his previously stated benchmarks. Someone like him with his personality would likely thrive with someone else to answer to. I say this, again, because I think we're alike and that's the only thing that consistently works for me.
I think 'collapse of the Vietnam deal' is premature. I have little doubt that we will be up and running there eventually, though this simple oversight again does not speak to Kim's prowess. It's a setback no matter which way you slice it, but it appears temporary.
We're in agreement, except I'm just a little more optimistic at the end of the day. I agree completely that we could be further along than we are now if Kim had realized his limitations earlier and hired a CFO or something to that end three years ago.
It seems to me that all KBLB needs is some fire under their keesters. Kim doesn't have to answer to anyone these days if his performance is not progressing at his previously stated benchmarks. Someone like him with his personality would likely thrive with someone else to answer to. I say this, again, because I think we're alike and that's the only thing that consistently works for me.
You'd be surprised how transferable lab skills are. These are likely lower level lab employees. I could start work at Kraig tomorrow with my skill set and some short on the job training.
Employees from Bethel will likely be doing simple things like PCR confirmation of gene inserts. This process is time consuming but technically very easy. The biggest thing employees like this would give is the ability to have a few more irons in the fire in earlier stages of insert development. This can lead to much faster ramping up later.
One good thing in the mid-term future is the Bethel program hopefully putting out dedicated KBLB techs. As the S-1 states, they're still indebted to mostly third party workers (University, WM).
It can be shocking what a few dedicated lab monkeys can do for productivity and spark. I think this will have a bigger affect on commercialization rate than has been given due credit. I have half a mind to apply after my PhD Is done!
Thanks for the support. This is a tough board to have a difference of opinion on at times, surprisingly even if you support the company.
I'm definitely not saying Kim is a liar, and I'm certainly not saying that he's incompetent. In a long bout of silence, I merely thought it was as good of a time as any to discuss what we have heard from Kim and how that may shape what we hear in the future. What else should we talk about in a quiet period? I'm not bothered by the silence at all, obviously since I added 50% to my position last week.
I'm suggesting as a mental exercise only (Kim's the guy, I'm not clamoring to change that) that with exactly the same amount of details put out over the last say 2 years, a different communication blueprint could have us in a stronger position than we're in now. The sheer fact that we DO have so many pieces in place but can't secure VC or other funding has to be on Kim's shoulders, right alongside all of his successes. There's more good than bad here, but it's not all roses and that has nothing to do with the pending S-1.
Yet when Kim releases press that doesn't fit your specific standards,there's issue.
I find your response to be overly simplistic. It's one thing to state the obvious which would be "Don't put your whole business schematic up for the world", but it's another thing to look at the history of PRs from KBLB and to say that Kim doesn't indulge in the extreme vaguearies. I think he prides himself in his legal parseltongue.
I believe that your argument could be summed up by the phrase 'Omission through abstraction." Kim doesn't lie because he's vague, therefore he tells the truth. I disagree. I find vague answers to be just as disingenuous.
I'd rather Kim said much less and waited to release PRs when he could describe the 'phase' instead of just saying 'phase complete'. That's meaningless language unless you're Kim or maybe Fraser. I wish he would speak with confidence at the time when it was most appropriate.
Keep in mind, this is someone that doesn't fret over long periods of silence. I'd take silence over the average PR we got in 2014 any day of the week.
I find Kim's language troubling at times too, mostly due to its familiarity. People have a way of letting their words frame their personality and I feel that Kim and I share a tragic flaw: We're both confident, capable over-promisers.
My job as a scientist is great because I do things nobody has ever done before. When I'm justifying this to my boss or granting agencies, I'm confident that I can do what I say but sometimes I'm purposefully vague to buy myself wiggle room. Kim, in my opinion, takes this decision a bit lightly and rarely says anything beyond conjecture these days. It's not too far of a leap to suppose he may be out of his element right now.
Can he suceed? I think and hope so. I just reread the S1-A however and it just reads quite hollow in terms of actual tangible plans for a next step. It doesn't exude business accumen, but rather, it reads like someone with a good idea of the short and long term with blinders on about how to bridge the gap between.
Today and yesterday I added a flippable set of shares which worked out to be ~50% of my core position. I'm a long-term holder, but at these levels I couldn't resist adding some to play with.
In the coming months, I have a few large expenditures coming my way (trips for work and my non-profit). It is my opinion (and just my opinion) that at the current levels, there's only a very small chance that come April 1st (my max 'flip' date for these shares) we'll still be at these levels. Even a rise to the 5's would be a 30% gain from today's PPS, and good (not even great) news could get us back there easily. Trading is pretty thin out there, spoken from someone that was trying to buy.
These are good days, not days to be dismal (unless you need cash ASAP, then it's obviously less good). This silence represents a buying opportunity to me, plain and simple. If you're a short term flipper, I think KBLB is the wrong move. There's some serious wrinkles that need to be ironed out many of which mojo, es1, and Truth debate very constructively. However, the science is there, we're in business with industry leaders that can guide our development (at least from the silk processing side), and now we're waiting on commercialization (from where the big farms will be to monetization).
When will commercialization news come? I don't think ANYONE on this board can say with any certainty. There are extreme pessimists that think Kim is a Goofus, and there are overly optimistic people that say if you squint, you can see Gallant's halo. The truth is somewhere in the middle, but I'm betting on the optimists being more right than the pessimists. But then if you weren't, why the heck would you be here?
Dropped my AON requirement, let's see if we can get this thing moving.
Can't get a bite on my AON trade. Things are trading pretty darn thin.
This isn't directed at you Ray, but I think it may be of help to the board.
"Homozygous" has a very clear, unambiguous definition:
1) For any gene of interest, a diploid organism (a single individual with two copies of each gene like silkworms and humans) is homozygous if both copies of the gene are identical. To have blue eyes, a human must be homozygous for both the 'non-brown' version of one eye gene, AND homozygous for the 'blue' version of the non-green gene.
Eye Color Analogy for Humans (Two Genes: Gene B + Gene G):
BBGG: Brown (Homozygous for both genes, B=B, G=G)
BbGg: Brown (Heterozygous for both genes, B!=b, G!=g)
bbGG: Green (Homozygous for both genes, b=b, G=G)
bbgg: Blue (Homozygous for both genes, b=b, g=g)
2) When referring to a colony of organisms, a population is homozygous at a gene area when all members of the group contain identical copies of the same gene version.
When KBLB refers to homozygosity, ALL that they mean is that when they pick any worm from the colony it should have an identical copy of the gene KBLB has inserted. If any individuals have the natural silkworm silk gene, the population is not homozygous for that gene.
The way that KBLB inserts its DNA into silkworms, once homozygosity is established carefully, there is VERY little risk of losing it (genes have no mechanism to 'revert back' or lose the insert).
Thought this may help! Happy to expand if any folks want.
RL is doing what scientists do.
I disagree. As far as I can see, Randy Lewis had one good idea and is currently in the process of blasting through grant money and researcher's time even though he knows that his method is no better than splicing the genes into E. coli.
At the end of the day, he's just making proteins, not silk. E. coli is a better system to make proteins than goats. IACUC, food, housing....working with vertebrates, ESPECIALLY transgenics, is a real pain. Invertebrates, on the other hand, have no regulation, breed quickly, and spin the silk into something useful.
Every time I see Randy Lewis's name, I cringe a bit because in my world I see people like him every day. One good idea...
Added a chunk today. Don't know if news in imminent or weeks away, but at these levels it's fun to add to the pot.
It's not random. Please read the PNAS paper.
Ideally, you can always control your environmental conditions within reason. That's why you want to use a silk farm that has been successful in the past, as they have this worked out.
What you can't do, not right away at least, is ensure complete genomic identity from worm to worm for every other gene. Ideally, you'd have a 'pure line' which would represent true clones. We're not there, as B. mori is not a model species in that regard (worms have variable genomes, and shuffle genes when they mate). You also can't easily sequence the entire genome of an individual quickly enough to do anything more than normal inbreeding. Inbreeding + time eventually leads to higher consistency (but not always higher quality).
Overall, from what I can gather from PRs it sounds like the silk being spun always has the spider silk component, but that there are worm-to-worm differences that have to do with silkworm DNA, not spider DNA. This is expected, and not really too worrisome as long as the variation is not major.
WHOA. WHOAAAA. WHOA.
Really?
WHOA. WHOAAAA. WHOA.
PLoS is almost the opposite of PNAS. PLoS is a journal that the PI pays to get into, while PNAS is highly respected across the board. You can publish some tripe in PLoS. There is barely peer review at PLoS.
Trust me, I have a paper in PLoS :)
EDIT: This isn't meant to imply all studies in PLoS are bad, but rather that there is a nearly infinitely higher chance of finding some poorly designed analyses in PLoS versus PNAS.
That is nice and broad, which is great for KBLB because, as you stated, I think it allows cases of infringement to be heard even in gray areas. The only section fairly easily circumventable is
"a) with a recombinant DNA construct selected from the group consisting of the nucleic sequence set fort in either SEQ ID NO: 32 or 33."
Gene patents are the Wild West and there many more than two sequences (or close variants, "tweaks") that could be inserted. HOWEVER, those sequences likely represent the most straightforward method, requiring that anyone trying to circumvent via that method would have to be a real protein engineer, and not just a transgenics person. That's unlikely in the time before KBLB can get to market, which is why I'm still quite positive on KBLB. I simply leave an array of possibilities open to leave room for brilliant innovations that I personally can't perceive right now. We're in a good place
Like I said, I hope it never comes down to an IP battle and KBLB simply beats everyone to market AND has a superior product. The broader the patent the better, obviously.
Let's just hope there's not some crazy spider whisperer out there that can skip the silkworm middle man
A Patent Analogy
The Problem: There's a disease that causes people's toes to fall off. Clinicians have determined that the cause of the toe loss is a DNA mutation. The DNA codes for a faulty protein that cuts off blood supply to the toes, causing them to die and fall off.
Company A: Company A makes a daily dose pill that when eaten, causes the bad protein to misfold and be destroyed. They patent the pill.
Company B: Company B discovers that extreme heat will cause the protein to break apart. They market heated socks, and toes stay attached. They patent the sock.
Both Company A and B came up with a solution to the problem of toe loss. Neither one would be protected by a patent because the mechanism of the treatments are completely non-overlapping. You can't blanketly patent "Stopping toes from falling off" the same way KBLB can't patent "putting spider DNA into silkworms".
Spider DNA of various sources can get into silkworms through numerous mechanisms, only one or two of which KBLB has patented. KBLB picked their path, and hopefully it holds up long enough to get to market. Nobody is showing strong competition now, but that's the nature of technological innovation. A discovery tomorrow in the lab, combined with more textiles knowledge than KBLB started with (let alone one of the other companies that already exists getting better science) could put KBLB at risk.
Is KBLB in the lead right now? Possibly/Probably depending on your world outlook. Are they guaranteed first to market? Absolutely not. That's not bashing, that's reality until they make a marketable product.