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.
SK wasn't as precise as I would have preferred on the time frame, but FY is a reasonable interpretation. But whether he meant this calendar year, or this FY, he was perfectly clear in "partnerships" plural, and that they would be brought to fruition.
From the March 7, 2014 earnings call...
Presumably, JB will be subpoenaed for a deposition in the case against CSM. If her actions are as nefarious as has been suggested, will she invoke the Fifth Amendment? And if so, would the court allow an adverse inference from her refusal to testify?
Or how about "tampered with by an outside contractor?" Some elements in the "financial media" have had a field day using misleading terms which falsely impute that the company somehow "screwed up" the trial, all the while ignoring the highly relevant part of the story that the company was able to salvage the trial after the tampering and move into Phase III.
CP - I think you hit the nail on the head: "OLD TIMES." It seems nearly impossible for many investors (or at least me) to interpret market signals under the new back box paradigm. I wonder if the new obsession with "liquidity" is not harmful to the long term investor. I also question the market maker exemption to short selling. When you couple that with algo trading, there are virtually unlimited shares to play with. I am beginning to suspect that algo trading had a lot to do with driving the price and volume in March, and that there may have been no other underlying reason for that level of activity. There have been comments about supply and demand. But is any of that relevant when the supply curve becomes skewed to nearly infinity?
Good point. Getting a monetary award might be easier than collecting it. Seems like there is a lot of money on the line, too. All imo.
Anyone have any idea how much insurance CSM has? That would seem to be the limiting factor on a settlement.
During the March CC, didn't SK say something to the effect that there would be a partner this year? That would certainly move the PPS, and there isn't much time left to "this year." All imo.
Those are the two big ones. It will take something to generate sustained buying interest. Otherwise, they just walk the price back down after each transient increase.
How does anyone establish a "grip" on a lack of buying interest?
Was there a 10-Q for July? July is usually the 10-K.
I can't recall what the common PPS was at the time, but there was no secondary market for the preferred since it was an IPO. Now the preferred trade under PPHMP, which is $0.50 below the offering price of $25.00.
Curious how they are going to sell the new shares at $25 when the existing preferred are trading at $24.50.
Four digit trades at this price and volume?
Seriously?
The problem with buying interest, imo, is who is going to be getting in at this point? I suspect most biotech savvy retail buyers have already accumulated all the shares that they want. And for some strange reason, all the day traders and algo bots made a hasty retreat immediately following the inexplicable price and volume surge in March.
I don't think anyone has argued that more dilution has no impact.
No argument on the number of shares. Dilution always erodes at shareholder value. But the price volatility is another thing. The market just loves to kick these kind of stocks around and unless you have special insight, you could get shaken out of your position trying to play the swings. Having said that, more power to those who do and profit from it!
Yep. I know the feeling. I bought TCLN at about $0.25 and sold at lot of my shares at $1.00 and then watched it run to $16 and back down, having sold none of the remaining shares.
Easy there chief...your shares are worth whatever price you sell them at. Otherwise, PPS is abstract.
CP - agree that the PPS is somewhat irrelevant whether $1.60 or $3.00 (other than $1.60 being a better entry point) since it is still undervalued both short and long term. Playing the dips is very risky. There would be nothing worse than selling at $3.00 then waking up one day and seeing the PPS open over $5.00 and take off with no turning back.
CP- Your partnership time frame seems to be on point. During the time that AbbVie was interested in 2012, the original Phase II results could have led to early approval and sales of product. But since the CSM errors in the Phase II caused a setback in the program of 3-4 years, one could envision partnership interest waning in the face of a longer horizon. But what is puzzling to me is why at least one of the partnership candidates wouldn't try to cut in line and catch the others sleeping. Equally puzzling is the runup leading to March and then sudden sharp drop in both price and volume. One guesses that there was either rumors on the street of an early partnership, or it was just an orchestrated pump and dump related to the first preferred offering. I'd be interested in your take on seemingly baseless change in price action since March.
The apparent sabotage, or to put it more charitably "inexplicable tampering," at CSM speaks for itself. What strikes me as bizarre about the Class Action appeal is why the plaintiff defiantly persists in the face of being thoroughly (and repeatedly) discredited at the Trial Court and now rejected for inclusion in the mediation program at the Appeals Court.
Clearly PPHM is not going to "settle" for even a penny with the frivolous plaintiff, and there really doesn't seem to be a genuine issue for the appeals court to consider, so the plaintiff is simply throwing good money after bad with no apparent hope for victory. But why?
The only logical answer seems to be a desire to throw another wrench the machine (by tying up resources and forcing the company to report "open litigation" to bankers and potential partners) as PPHM continues to move closer to market. Meanwhile, any positive news on company is instantly (and predictably) greeted with a suspiciously timed hit piece from a market incompetent blogger with access to a bully pulpit who is notorious for such shenanigans. All things considered, one could almost make the argument that multiple parties are deliberately trying to slow the company's progress by any means possible. But why all that effort against a company alleged by some to have nothing of value? All imo, of course.
CSM's exposure on the tampering lawsuit is huge, and longer they wait to settle, the higher the potential damages for loss in time to market since that too will become an easily quantifiable figure upon FDA approval. If the tampering allegations are well founded, they may also want to settle sooner rather than later to avoid discovery and a deposition of the project manager responsible.
All completely imo.
Peregrine's attorney probably told them they are not getting a penny so it goes to the judges without further discussion. The plaintiffs have already had several bites at the apple, all of which were discredited by the trial court, so it's hard to imagine the appeals court giving them another chance to advance their ridiculous theory. Therefore, one has to wonder why they persist in such an apparent exercise in futility...unless, of course, the goal is simply disruption with no real expectation of a favorable verdict.
It looks like the clingy class-action shakedown artists just got told to go pound sand...
I figured $4.70. I must be a basher!
It's hard to quibble with the day to day value of an undervalued stock since it is always too low...OTOH the shenanigans that go on in today's opaque markets are pathetic. PPS isn't even loosely tethered to supply, demand, or actual shares available. The only way we will get close to realistic pricing is when the "insiders" know that real buyers are lining up outside the door and they can get burned playing with counterfeit shares. All imo.
It's not just "mice" news in a vacuum. From an investor or potential partner POV, this preclinical study should be evaluated in the totality of the platform, especially in conjunction with previously released Phase II breast cancer results. I'm not a trading expert, but this rally doesn't appear to have the finger prints of day traders or algos, both of which have been conspicuously on the sidelines for awhile now.
All imo.
Probably #1: a partnership. Then "To the moon!"
#7 is intriguing only in that one has to wonder why they persist after being roundly discredited at the trial court with no real hope of winning anything on appeal. Basic game theory could suggest that they hope to throw a "wrench in the machine" by inducing delays...and that they have reason to know precisely what that "machine" is.
All imo.
I see what you are saying. I was thinking PPHM vs CSM. Suits for wrongful death are another area entirely.
SOL is from filing. The case was filed on 9/24/12.
Good question. I wonder what amount of insurance they carry. Also, could the carrier try to dodge based on fraudulent or illegal conduct?
Decision posted on the CSM MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment as to Validity and Enforceability of Limitation of Liability Clauses in Master Services Agreement.
I pasted the conclusion below. The decision is 44 pages and can be found on Pacer. There is apparently no charge for viewing opinions.
They keep dropping the bid. Someone must have a big order in at ShareBuilder.
It looks like they are requesting a transcript of the hearing since the court reporter is referenced. Good question as to why. There is no decision on the Motion For Summary Judgement posted yet. Pure conjecture, but maybe the judge ruled against them and is still drafting his opinion. I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't a transcript be ordered in conjunction with an appeal? Can they even appeal a Motion For Summary Judgment that is partial in nature (validity of alleged limited liability clause) and simply not granted, i.e, not a final order? Could they make a Motion For Reconsideration? Maybe the lawyers on the board can comment.
Also, before the dose switching was discovered, there was potentially a much quicker path to market.
Per Joesph Shan...
It was continued by the court's own motion to 7/28 @ 9:00 a.m. There is no indication whether there was oral argument, or if the hearing is still going on, or if the judge is still drafting his ruling. If CSM's motion for a cap on their liability is denied, they will be on the hook for a very large sum of money..at least eight figures in my layperson's opinion.
Someone already has taken legal action against the company, BOD and management. The case was dismissed. Although their case was thoroughly discredited at the trial court level, they have appealed. Given that the plaintiffs have demonstrated through trial documents that they have inside knowledge of the company's efforts to secure a partner, it is not a stretch, imo, to consider that the plaintiffs - with no serious hope of a victory at the appellate level - think they can strong arm a settlement by creating a "potential" liability that impedes partnership and finance options, or they hope that such machinations will help keep a temporary lid on the share price.
Is there anything that Sockpuppet writes that isn't kind of a reach? Sockpuppet performs a function...journalism it is not.
All imo.
It will be interesting to see what happens with Avid revenue. I believe billings were lagging last quarter due to production scheduling, which kept revenue on the light side. Those billings would have been pushed into this quarter. We could see a bump if this quarter's billings are on target. Of course, PPHM doesn't trade on earnings, but it may be one less bashing opportunity. All imo.
But preferred shares are still trading at a discount. Odd.