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 it would be more aptly coined the B.S. ratio.
It is amazing to me that an investor would actually be advocating for less communication from the company.
what is a more accurate representation of historical returns, a sample period of 4 yrs or 70 yrs?
since 1929 Feb has historically been the 2nd weakest month of the year, second only to Sept.
February is NOT "historically a weak month for the market".
Perhaps you were thinking about the 1800's?
Please refrain from posting things that are easily refutable and simply not true.
Personally, I appreciate all negative viewpoints as long as they can be backed up and adequately supported. The investment thesis needs to be continually challenged and objectively reassessed based on the information flow. That makes for a healthy discussion board. I think what is not welcome is what appears to be negativity just for the sake of being negative. And stating it over and over again.
I'm curious, what increase in odds do you give them by virtue of the fact that the mode of action involves no alteration of cell function? That's a very significant factor that you seem to continually ignore.
correcting your somewhat common inaccuracies is not cheerleading.
What is unusual is the amount of stock for sale that continues to come through the same MM (EDGX). They have been driving the sell side for over a month now. A big player there for sure. Not that many possibilities on who it would be. Part of it could be hedging of warrants (from previous rounds) expiring at the end of March. Or possibly SeaSide did not sell all of their stock earlier. BK?
I care very little about the short term action. The company will be made or not on the results of human trials. Regardless of the price today, if they are successful in a Phase I/IIa next year the stock will head towards the $10B mark well before the drug is approved or does a dime in sales (see ICPT, PCYC, VRUS). If not successful then it goes equally dramatically in the other direction. But there are a lot of potential catalysts between here and trials, so assuming the company reasonably executes on the timeline given I suspect the price will be significantly higher entering those trials.
short interest only went up by about 8,000 shares in the latest period to 808,301. Expect it to keep rising though.
I imagine there are now well over 1,000,000 shares short.
the decline now exceeds 2X the amount of the dilutive effect of the offering. A bit overdone I would say if people are using that as a reason.
The GLP drug is required for humans.
E*Trade
I gave it a test and I still get the notation if I try to enter a short order.
NNVC still has to do the "data gathering" phase of the toxicity study. Because the toxicity is so low it will take a great deal more drug to do the study than usual so they have to wait for the new manufacturing facility to open before they can get enough drug to do the data gathering phase (which uses a lot more animals than the dose ranging phase).
Yes! I hope you are training hard!
Forz-
I'm showing a close Dec 31 2012 of 47 cents. Multiply by $3.50 to get the split adjusted price which gives you 1.645 to close out 2012.
av - If you adjust for the reverse split, I believe the gain on the year was 192%. ($1.64 to $4.80)
The price per Unit was $5.25, equal to a four percent (4%) discount to the 20-day VWAP of the NNVC stock price on Friday, January 17
All I'm saying is they make it appear the investor's who bought on Jan 17th had to ONLY give up 4% for the deal when in essence their losses are much bigger. The press release should have read "The price per Unit was $5.25, equal to a 13.2% discount to the closing price of Jan 17th."
yeah, you conveniently left out the other key point (mode of action) which substantially raises the odds of translating effectively to humans. You continue to underestimate the significance of that point.
I'm curious, do you still not attach any significance to the mode of action working in the bloodstream vs altering cell function as virtually all other drugs do? How about the fact there is apparently no toxicity at MFD?
arch -
the stock has been trading in a range between roughly $4.70 and $5.50 for several months now and is the range the stock was in when this deal was initially put together. It is important as a company not to hose your big investors. What transpired was the only fair way to do it... the company is protected against a quick spike down in the stock (and more dilution) and the investors are protected against a quick spike up (setting them up for a quick and potentially significant short term haircut). Nobody knew which way it was going to go. How would you feel as an investor right now if you bought this deal at the sudden 4-day spike price of $6.05? We, as retail investors, should be pretty happy this thing got done at $5.25. The stock is right back in the same range and the company now has an additional $19M in the coffers.
lief -
the stock has been stable since the initial reaction to the offering while the rest of small biotech has been hit hard, no? Compare the last 3 days of trading (the period of the broad market selloff) between NNVC and small cap biotech...NNVC has held up MUCH better. This lends credibility to those who have been saying the stock would have rebounded by now from the offering woes if not for the overall market weakness.
Stocks almost always react negatively to offerings. Strip out the offering and the stock has been steady, unlike the rest of the market and small biotech in particular. That was the point I made originally. Not sure why you are having so much trouble with it. Here's a visual for you, note the clear outperformance (vs. comparable sector stocks) after the initial adjustment following the offering --
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=nnvc&insttype=&freq=1&show=True&time=4
A lot of us really believe in NNVC 's success , but the frustration is that the dates keep changing .
Uh, the original statement said Fri and Mon, which were clearly after the offering. Today, as you can clearly see, there are many small biotechs down 8%+, some down as much as 15%. NNVC is off 2 1/2%. Similar action on Fri.
Besides the effects of the offering were digested the next day, that low still has not been breached.
that's why I said Fri and today, when the effects of the offering had largely already been digested by the market.
High beta stocks always fare worse in market selloffs. If you look at sector performance today and Fri, NNVC is actually holding up better than most.
the company laid out a complete projected timeline at the LD Micro presentation last month that answers every one of your questions. The update today tells us that so far they are executing well on this blueprint.
Completely wrong. There sure seems to be a lot of drive-by researchers here...
For those who have not seen it and get Netflix, there is a fairly entertaining 2 season series called "Surivors" which is about a killer flu pandemic that wipes out most of the world population --
Set in the present day, the series focuses on a group of ordinary people who survive the aftermath of a devastating viral pandemic – referred to as "European flu" – which kills most of the world's population due to its causing Cytokine Storms in the body's immune system. The series sees the characters struggling against terrible dangers in a world with no society, no police and no law, led by the de facto matriarch of the group, Abby Grant.
It was not hard at all to short it on the BB (at least for the MM's). Typically 30 to 50% of the daily trading volume for NNVC there consisted of short transactions. But the accumulated short interest there was very low, meaning it was primarily day trading with little held short overnight.
Typical accumulated short interest in the stock would be something around 10%. Could go much higher but I think that is a reasonable target once it has been trading on the new exchange for awhile.
There has been no change in that respect. Even though the current short interest is very low (about 2%) the stock has shown as "Hard To Borrow" since inception on the new exchange. I expect the short interest to steadily rise to more typical levels.
No, warrants add to shares outstanding on exercise.
you are issued shares on exercise (assuming the share price goes above $6.05)
about 3.8M (plus warrants later on exercise).
about 2.5M warrants
It was a direct offering at a purchase price of $5.25, each share coming with a 5 yr warrant to purchase .65 shares.
No, this was a direct offering and will not show as a trade, only as an increase in share count (and cash).
Right, I'd say we were fairly lucky to get the $5.25 on pricing. If not for the 3 day spike at the end of the 20 day VWAP period we would have been looking at a deal price around $4.70.
What Crooks NNVC are!
They will have this back to over 100m OS before they finish the tox test! LOL
Crazy and one invests in these crooks!!
Enough money for their life style for several more years. LOL
Crooks.....
Pull up the statements by the same clowns last Feb, the stock is up 5X since their nearly identical proclamations a year ago. The clues were there then just as they are now. But your story never changes....
But it sounds like the limit is another triple. At $15, nearly 15X the price of a year ago, you'll be on board. I thought investing was about getting ahead of the trend?
Do you ever wonder why the stock always runs up another 50-100% almost immediately after you check in with your latest incoherent divinations? You are certainly a reliable indicator of sorts.