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 i would have a coronary if that actually/finally happened. but, why not?
got it, that was directed to Nader, not us. sorry if i was rude.
so are you poking fun at all of us investors? do you really think anyone here likes that someone is selling off at the EOD? thanks pears, your smarter than all of us. feel better now?
Its all speculation, but it seems investment firms are trying to get capital into CYDY makes me think there is some inside talks already with some BP. again - pure speculation. the confidence from mgmt i can't imagine is blind optimism.
I seem to remember a post from long ago that stated the FDA can tend to go past the 60 days. they just aren't that efficient with is ironic given BTD is meant to accelerate the process. I don't think the past post was based on much fact however.
I'm an option and future trader and this biotech lottery situation is wearing thin. can't throw in the towel for sure but i like most want this to be done (in a good way!) I know for certain that if i did cut my size or fully throw in the towel the next day there will be a BO for tens of billions, so i hang on!
thanks pears, I agree data is a higher priority to BP but i wonder if BP is more concerned with the risk of not getting or a delayed FDA approval. that seems very unlikely for pro 140 and since there have been no rumors of a BO i guess data is the real compelling motivation.
good info, thanks! I would rather get a BO so i don't have to incremental trade decisions and get he profit quicker, i have uses for the cash also. However having a longer term growth based on some BP support would be nice also. Just wondering what BP really looks at to finally pull the trigger.
I would like to hear opinions on what is more important to get some sort of partnership or BO in the near future. I have been thinking collecting as much data as possible to show pro 140 works in the market size they claim is most motivating. however this morning i was thinking that BP might really be focused on the probability that pro 140 will get some sort of FDA approval. my thinking is that FDA approval or some high level of confidence that there will be approval means that pro 140 is a marketable product for certain. I realize adjunct approval is a smaller market and would potentially get a lower offer than a mono approval but any offer or rumor of an offer would take this stock to a new level. thoughts?
your right, this stock can go parabolic up and down with more than average volume, which is not a lot of volume. i'm hoping for the parabolic up where buyers show up and know one wants to sell.
I'll admit i'm not the expert on liqidity but i remember well years ago that 5k shares would move this stock by a nickel. so, when 100k shares trade and it moves a penny, that's an improvement. don't get me wrong, its no AAPL.
It is nice that for such a small stock that there is this much liquidity. must be i a lot of open bids at .71
if you add the 2 trades together it's 66,800 shares - maybe someone just decided to bail?
what are you commenting on?
It would seem logical for a charity organization to support pro 140 but on the other hand it might be odd for a charity to be investing or contributing in a biotech company. not saying it wouldn't happen but it might be a tough sell to contributors of these organizations to know some of there money is going to speculative stocks. maybe that is common?
thanks for making the phone call - always good to get some new insight to what is going on at CYDY headquarters.
thanks for that 123boom, good one!
"Pulson idiot probably through is computer out the window this morning"
I like that theory - maybe Paulson did not want to miss out this go around? who knows how much is CYDY asking for capital and how much is investment groups asking to invest more?
(i spelled capital correctly this time - sorry i'm a bad speller!)
thanks for posting that lawman - its good to hear the other side of these paulson theories we throw around. i guess at this point it is hard to argue with why is the SP at the same level as many years ago despite the level of pro 140 development that has taken place. after all, this is not a charity - its a publicly traded company.
I think that was me, And to be clear i have no problem recognizing my optimism and opinions as wrong. It really does not matter what investment firm is putting up the money, what matter's is the nature of the deal. we know that these firms are selling off there shares to have risk free warrants. It has been brought up in conf. calls to Nader that this is what is going on. I get that that is how you raise money but when it is so damaging to the SP it is nothing but difficult to endure repeatedly. What really needs to happen is for this raise before catalysts to allow for real stock movement to the up side. the worry that every good news will be tempered by capitol raises immediately after the news may be flipped around this time - i certainly hope so. I will be the first person to ask in the next conf. call as to why they decided to raise capitol at this low SP.
I totally agree, however i am very against hindsight management. We can sit here and be pissed that they did not RS last year and get uplisted and assume that would put us in a better position today. But, there may be a good reason for this, there might have been a very real disaster by being on the nasdaq and there might be significant headwinds if the SP was higher. I don't know but risk is a very real problem in SP, CYDY's decision to focus on developing pro140 as quickly as possible for a comparatively low cost may be the smart choice. where would we be if there was a RS and the SP got so shorted that we fell off the Nasdaq? where would we be if we were doing capitol raised just because of the cost to be on the Nasdaq? were would we be if we could not raise the capitol quickly and easily due to the increased risk to the investment firms because we are on the Nasdaq? I seriously don't know but hindsight mgmt is not really all rainbows and pots of gold.
well, they would not be raising this much capitol if they were not spending it on something beyond the normal expenses. increased capitol requirements meant trial are costing money which means they do have more enrolled in trials. that's good for sure.
I'm surprised that they are raising capitol with paulson also - it would be interesting what the reasoning is behind that. Not that there is any real issue with that - their money is green just like anyone elses. there does not seem to be any difference in the deal from previous capitol raises.
Thanks Chump, as much as i'm a little upset they are raising capitol at low stock prices i wonder what the silver lining is. In the past they have had a conf. call and then a capitol raise of some type, now they seem to be flipping that around? It might be possible that the good news that might be brewing wont be held back by the weight of a near term capitol raise on the horizon? this could set up for the jump in SP we have been waiting for!
i picked up on your sarcasm, but i think you need to realize that just because you woke up this morning wondering why we did not get great news from CYDY does not mean there is a problem or anything to be concerned about.
it will do just fine. we have patients on pro 140 that show it works on its own. you know this.
you don't know if there is no BP interest. any information about that type of interest would be insider info and we won't know until something is concrete. the 30 patients really were not beginning to be recruited until last December when the protocol was finalized with the FDA. to say the recruitment has been going on for many months is incorrect, it has been 2 months and we were told that the end of the 1st quarter is when they plan on being fully enrolled. that is still a month off. I personally have answered this question previously so when you request others to respond to your repetitive comments/questions you are either ignoring the answers you get or think my response is incorrect. please stop wasting everyone's time with these posts that serve only to scare away prospective new investors with scare mongering, nonfactual and repetitive comments.
maybe they have the 30 and are just waiting for the 1 week VL data, maybe they have 29 patients, maybe many things. assuming that there is a problem just because you are bored?
I seem to remember not to long ago you were really a fan of getting the right patients so we have great data, not so much getting patients fast.
Good point, however I'm not sure I see the connection between a CFO, CSO and enrollment for the trial. The trial is more or less a pay a vendor to do there job situation. I'm sure mgmt could publicize more to attract patients but they also need to be distant from the actual enrollment and trial management to keep the integrity of the trial.
here are my opinions on your list of cons:
for the CSO situation - pro 140 is developed and it's mechanism is well documented. An expensive full time employee that would have nothing to do 90% of the time - Why? especially since the inventor of pro 140 and the presenter they hired for CROI are a phone call away.
cash is always burning for a no-profit company. nothing has changed and mgmt has show to only raise what they need. dilution is always going to be a problem, the only solution is to move as fast as possible to completing a larger data set - which they are doing.
I think a former senior exec from gilead is big time enough for me. why have more paychecks when the value is only the product.
CROI - never thought it would move the stock price and if you did (and i don't remember you posting that it would) i would like to know why when past road shows and conferences didn't. my attitude is that there is no reason to not do CROI.
Niche drug? seriously? how much market potential do you need?
NIH is a government agency - they don't day trade there funding and it takes way to long to chase down funding. not worth the waste of time when capitol is so available already. time is way more important than the dilution that occurs.
institutional involvement being limited because not on nasdaq - i kind of agree but the potential of falling off the nasdaq would be far more damaging than the possible benefit.
Mgmt has very openly stated that they will have adjunct enrolled by the end of Q1, Q1 is not over, we have a month left.
the rebounders has been addressed but i would be nice to know that dosing does in face solve the problem.
Small"N" is a trade off with speed - adjunct is moving very fast and mono is pulling the larger # for a fast and complete understanding of pro140. i think this approch is smart.
competition is getting closer but that is always the case - moving fast is very important and that is why doing capitol raises as needed even with the dilution and working closly with the FDA is so important. Mgmt have been doing just that.
rumors of BO are distracting, an actual BO is what matters.
I don't think Paulson is really where future funds are coming from. Wainwright has an offer of roughly $90 million available so I've heard thorough this board. using the Paulson name to instill some sort of fear for some reason is weak. Paulson's money is what started this very fast pace development of pro 140 also. I don't think anyone will disagree that clinical trials cost money and it had to come from somewhere.
pears, again you are cherry picking unknowns and calling it DD. when you say it has been 1.5 years to try and fill the 30 patients for adjunct you are wrong and it has been explained in the past. the enrollment was put on hold until the protocol and final approvals were done from the FDA. they were not actively enrolling for 1.5 years, please stop making that statement. as for the impact of CROI, i never thought that medical professionals would crack open their laptops, log into there brokerage accounts and buy CYDY as they were presenting. it is a conference to learn, discuss and further treatments, not and investment propaganda show. I don't understand why you keep taking past events, build them up to be huge disappointments and blame mgmt for doing what they should be doing - spreading the word about what they have. DD is when you learn about know facts and making decisions with your money. it is not yelling the sky is falling just because there aren't enough facts yet. this is a risky investment, CYDY is not google. if you want a safe bet go invest in a high dividend stock or what ever.
I'm not a medical/scientific person but my take away is that this works by exposing the virus so drugs can kill it. Pro 140 protects the cell from the virus so it would seem to me that pro 140 would be used with this potential hiv cure. I don't think that someday this will replace pro 140. I'm not worried.
I'm staying around - the value of the education i get from most posts far outweighs the bashing. hope many keep posting through this opportunity of a lifetime!
so you got some good insight and we should hold on, but no info to us to report. do you understand how making posts like that tend to dis-credit everything you say?
why would corporate give you inside info? if they did give you info that you will not share with us then i would assume it is either not inside info and you don't want to share or it is info that you are reading into too much. please clarify what you are talking about
Why do you think mono is worth $1.5 - 2 billion? honestly curious because this is a $10-15 billion/year market just in the US. Why would the value be so low in comparison market size?
It is a great feeling when we get a new poster, typically stating how promising pro140 is and how this has not been bought by BP yet. I've been with this for years and sometime forget the magnitude of this opportunity. looking at it with someone else's fresh eyes gives me confidence that i'm not just talking myself into something.
GILD is a large company, i don't think they have a dis-interest in HIV. i think there are just many other products withing GILD that are running concurrently. HIV i'm sure is a very high priority.
Just to give you a little suggestion, please cut down on the number of exclamation points you use, it sounds like you are yelling at us. You do make constructive comments but if they are yelled in our face it really makes it difficult to take what you are saying seriously. I mean this in the kindest way possible.