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.
Extremely positive PR. Seymour put on his best posssibly due to frustration with current stock price. Just to show my own faith that this is excellent news, I have put a 60,000 share order at 0.58. I do not expect it to fill, unless Seaside is angry.
Seeker
I am looking forward to a pop in stock prices too. This stock has been oversold for so long that it must bounce now. Just look at the technical picture. Ever since June 2011 the stock has been under severe pressure. Such a period has to come to an end. Hopefully, 52 cents was that double bottom. In my opinion if it crosses the 50 day moving average, which is not much higher from here, the stock will try to test 200 day moving average which is slightly over $1. Even if it has problem going so far up, it should go upto 80-90 cents range. Everything in biotech is up since end of last year. It makes no sense for just NNVC to be so oversold. A period of overselling must be followed by a period of relief, something that has not happened in over six months. Hopefully, Seaside lets it go up this time.
Seeker
Quote "The conversion this week was significantly smaller"
Why was it smaller?
They keep getting almost 80-100K shares to sell per day until April at current prices. I am hopeful that if Seaside contract is not renewed then they may run out of shares to sell by mid year.
Gloom and doom on the board apart, one has to look at the reality. Closing our eyes will not make the stock go up.
A look at the chart shows what is happening. There has been relentless selling for more than one year. Any attempts for the stock to get any price rise are quickly stamped out. In 2012 almost all biotechs are up, just NNVC is still kissing the bottom. Even relentless sellers know that you have to let the stock breath once in a while. They let this one breath once in a while, they just do not let it rise. In fact, I think this stock is so oversold now that even Seaside will realize that they have to let it rise for a week or so. After all this is not a bankrupt company and they have sold it so much that it seems NNVC has died.
I would not be surprise if now they stop their selling for a week or so. That will not mean that Seaside has quit selling. It will just mean that NNVC has such low relative strength that for Seaside's own benefit they have to let the stock recover some before starting their selling once again. Seaside may not be an investor, but they certainly understand how to sell a stock.
Somebody bought NNVC this morning and raised prices in the process, Seaside promptly sold and now has wiped out all gains.
Quote - "Seymour speaks like an honest man telling a story simply, but one that sounds too good to be true. "
I agree with that assessment. Seymour seems like an honest man to me. I just commented that to Wall Street skeptics he may sound in that way. Not to me. I was impressed when I talked with him. If Wall Street guys did not have that assessment why would our share price be where it is?
Seeker
Very interesting comment.
(1) What insider trading did I imply? Insider buys are not insider trading!!
(2) When did Google trade well below $100? I remember clearly that Google IPO happened at about $100 and Google has always traded above the IPO level. So when did you find Google trading for pennies? I am talking about public trading, not personal trading like I will sell you my old stereo for $1.
(3) See me on the other side? What? Do you believe in reincarnation?
It is matter of where the stock price should be and where it will actually be. I will take a bet with you. If no insider buying takes place soon, I bet that the price will be below $1 even with an effective IND. An IND is nothing, it is just paperwork. I will also bet that the difference in price one week before the IND is approved to one week after IND is approved will be no more than 20 cents different. I wish I could talk to you directly and take $100 bet on each issue.
More important if the stock price does not take off soon, lots of people are going to call NNVC a loser and are going to sell it. Just watch the selloff starting in April 2012. The annual cycle has now become predictable.
All this talk is pure speculation and I do not like to speculate. The fact is NNVC is trading at a horrible valuation and it is shameful. Can you justify the current valuation and our stock close to 3 year lows when the small cap biotechs have all taken off and are well off their lows. Do not find someone going bankrupt for justification, just look at averages. Are we this bad, or else what do you propose is making the market designate us this horrible?
Seeker
I fail to see what is the difference between CTIX and NNVC. NNVC is with a market cap of $75 M, while CTIX is at $50 M. That is about the same. Unfortunately, CTIX is now trading twice of its low in December, while NNVC is still scratching the bottom. That is a terrible comment on NNVC and makes me mad.
To me NNVC should be rated at much higher market cap. We have the cides which are potential killers of any type of virus. What more could be asked? NNVC is almost the holy grail. Why should our stock be priced so low? Other than lack of supoort from insiders and selling through Seaside, I cannot see a single reason. I say again it is not the company technology that is keeping us back, it is the lack of insider buying.
Without a single doubt Dr. Diwan's commitment to build a Pilot cGMP facility with his own money is a big commitment to NNVC technology. If he did not have full faith in NNVC technology he would not put multiple million dollars at stake. Not only he has invested the money raised from stock sales, but he has also taken loans to build the facility. Typically these loans have to be personally gauranteed, so if there is a default, he would be held personally responsible. I do not think Diwan's commitment is small, it is huge. That is one major reason I have no hesitation in holding on to this stock.
There are two issues:
(1) Wall Street has not recogninized the huge commitment that Dr. Diwan has made. This is clearly shown by the continuing decline in stock prices. Mostly it is because Wall Street has lots of doubts about small cap companies. Wall Street requires demonstrable commitment by insiders, not one but by almost all of them. That is usually shown by insider buying. If insiders do not believe in their own technology, why should Wall Street? In this case Dr. Diwan has definitely shown commitment. Aparently it is not enough. This is not my interpretation, continuing decline in stock price is the proof.
(2) What about commitment by other insiders? Dr. Seymour continues to show commitment by talking. Just verbal commitment is not enough. What about show of that commitment by putting your personal money behind what you are saying? That is done by some insider buying. Dr. Seymour makes a lot of money from the cash being raised by selling stock to Seaside. Can he not put some of that money for insider buying? Let us face it. To a skeptic Dr. Seymour sounds like a used car salesman. All talk so far, not a single insider buy. No wonder Wall Street has no faith in him. His going to all the conferences is a waste, nobody believes him. If they believed him, would we not see some results in stock price? I really do not think he is a used car salesman. He just does not understand that he needs to show commitment by actions other than talk. When I talked with him, I came out impressed by him. It is just that Wall Street is a skeptical bunch and needs to see something more than just talk. What about other insiders, could they also not show some commitment by small insider purchases.
I think the entire problem of NNVC stock price is caused by lack of insider buys. Let us do that. Let Dr. Seymour make a relatively big ($50K or so) insider buy and let other insiders make small purchases with him. Then I would be really surprised if the stock does not take off. It is not a one on one match, that is a $100K insider buy will not offset somebody selling $100K of stock. An insider buy of $100K will mean that we will see 100 times of that money put by investors in the company. We will easily see $10 million investment by investors who were uncommited so far. That will be big deal. I believe that this company has a big future. I do not want to see it labeled a big loser and its stock price at 20 cents.
Seeker
As you say share buy-back is totally out of question. The company is doing cash generation by selling share at a discount so that they have enough money to conduct trials. This definitely is not a time for the company to do share buy-back. A share buy back is done only by companies who have huge cash surpluses.
In case of NNVC a small insider buy ($100K or so by multiple insiders total) will go a long way in restoring investor confidence in the company by telling the entire investment company that the management is confident that the company's technlogy will succeed. For a share buy back to be wothwhile it would have to be much larger in size. In our case at least of the order of $20 million.
Share buy back is done by companies which have huge surplus cash flows which they do not know what to do with. Investing in their business does not generate high returns, so they chose between dividends or buy-backs. In our case investing in our technology should have huge returns if the technlogy succeeds, of which I think there is a very big probability.
Seeker
Sure, I agree that this was insurance. It was the way that insurance was bought that I have a problem. Look at two issues:
(1) With continued Seaside selling the stock price had deteriorated below $1. We all know that $1 is too low a price. We already had cash for 18 months. So we did not desperately need insurance, we could have waited. If we had waited for 6 months, say until March 2012, the stock price would have recovered and maybe we would have held above $1 for foreseeable future.
(2) Even if the company was really worried about continued funding and had to do (1) the insiders still had one more weapon in hand. They need to show faith in technology behind the stock and do some insider buying when the stock falls too low. However, we still have not seen any insider buying which would clearly say to the investment community that 50 cents is too low a price and the management believes that the stock is worth much more so they are buying with their own money.
I am still hopeful that we will see some insider buying soon. Otherwise we will see disastrously low stock price. 20 cents is not out of question.
Note what is going on in the market now. The winners are being selected. Most of my holdings, except NNVC, are now well off the lows in December. They have been bought. The standard way of selecting winners in this market is this: (1) First buy all stocks, (2) Then check which ones were able to hold higher prices. (3) All those who did not hold higher prices are losers. Sell all losers.
So if we do not see any price appreciation for NNVC in a strong up market of first quarter, be sure we will see much lower prices. What is the problem with 20 cents price? The problem is you are then defined a very big loser and market loses faith in you. Even if you show great technical progress, market says "Oh these guys are losers, maybe they are lying". Let us wait for more technical news. Maybe we should not buy this until they clear phase 3 and are ready to file NDA. In general no money is made until you sell your drugs, until then it is just faith from the market that you will do what you said you will do. If that faith is lost big problems occur.
Seeker
No doubt that was the reason. However, when one takes an action one cannot deny the result. We now have more money, but at the same time have a much lower stock price. Both results should have been expected.
Seeker
Do not think that Seaside is keeping the price down on their own. What do they care? They have no investment in the stock. They buy the stock at 15% discount and quickly sell it in the open market. Hopefully, by the time they sell the price has not deteriorated to such an extent that they have to sell more than 15% below current price.
Let us put Seaside transaction in perspective. Current price is about 60 cents. Using clauses in the sale agreement, let say us for Seaside the price may be calculated at about 57 cents. Then they get 15% discount, so the price at which they buy stock from company is 48.5 cents. So as long as Seaside can sell at 48.5 cents or above they make a profit. Do you think they can sell at 48.5 cents or higher or not. I think in 99% of cases Seaside makes money in each and every transaction. They just buy and sell. They do not care whether the price goes up or down. They just buy and sell. I would do the same in their position. Note they are doing this type of transaction not just with NNVC, but with many other companies in multiple types of industries. They do not invest in these companies, they just buy and sell.
The style in which they sell is based on their conviction that it is better to sell in an up market when the stock is being bought. Note when we had excellent news that is we had filed with FDA recently, the investors bought the stock because it had good news. However, Seaside sold heavily during that period so that the stock price did not show any gains. That was because this stock does not have good enough volume for Seaside to sell all they buy. Whenever, there is good volume they sell.
Also note that at this price Seaside is buying a lot of shares every two weeks. It is very difficult to sell all those shares in open market. Seaside is coping as best as they can. Currently they are buying about 400,000 shares every week. It is tough to sell that many. On an average they have to sell almost 80,000 shares every day. Note that is about the volume in this stock. Most of it is Seaside selling.
The people who have decided that low company price is not much of a problem is the company. The company decided to make another transaction with Seaside even when the stock was below $1. The company is responsible for this stock price decline, not Seaside. Seaside is just a trader, we cannot hold them responsible for stock price. Why should they care? We ourselves (NNVC corp.) are responsible for what is happening to the stock price.
Seeker
The reason behind low relative strength is Seaside selling. The way Seaside selling works in NNVC is this:
When the market is strong and everybody is buying stocks, Seaside sells NNVC strongly. That way NNVC goes down. Then when the market is weak and everybody is selling stocks, Seaside quits selling NNVC and NNVC has some recovery. However, the market is weak and nobody wants to buy the stock anyway, so NNVC recovers weakly in very low volume. Then the market recovers and buying starts and Seaside NNVC selling starts. Right now the market is weak and Seaside will let NNVC recover in weak situation. No wonder NNVC stock can never make a recovery and it has very low relative strength.
Plot market and NNVC in one chart and watch slow stochastic. You will always see that the cycles for the two are opposite and NNVC relative strength is always weakening.
I had suggested insider buying to allow NNVC gain some strength. However, personal money belonging to the management is too valuable to be spent on a stock such as NNVC.
Seeker
Did somebody post a link to the Stonegate report?
Seeker
DFG,
If the first approval is likely to be outside of US, why have we not heard of application process in other countries. We seem to be focused on FDA application process.
Seeker
I think that yesterday just before close the group of oversold small stocks was bought rapidly. That is what caused the spike. This morning many of the undeserving ones were sold and the good ones continued to keep their gains.
Seeker
Pat Cox letter touting Biotime
Catastrophic Success
By Pat Cox, Editor
Breakthrough Technology Alert
When the second stimulus bill passed in February, 2009, I explained to my readers that the "crowding out effect" would guarantee its failure. I took no pleasure in predicting accurately that increased government borrowing would crowd out private investment in innovation, from which flows economic and employment growth.
I bring this up simply because I have extraordinarily good news regarding cancer therapeutics, and I don't want you to assume that I am afflicted with blind optimism. For decades, in fact, I've been among the economists who have warned that our current distress was coming. As you know, we were ignored by the intelligentsia. As a result, the entirely avoidable mortgage and housing bubbles expanded and collapsed, which accelerated our even larger problem – the entitlements crisis.
Political corruption and malfeasance were involved, we now know. I suspect, however, that the larger reason the warnings signs were ignored was essentially psychological. Most people avoid extremely unpleasant news until they no longer have a choice.
This is particularly true with regards to the entitlement crisis because it involves perhaps the greatest unpleasantness of all. It is the reality that we are all facing the prospect of aging, serious illness, and death – in that order.
The aging population, however, is the root cause of our financial problems. More than a third of the federal budget goes to transfer payments and services for people age 65 or older. Nevertheless, we're behind on the payments and the bill is increasing as more and more people live longer.
This is the result, primarily, of unexpected scientific breakthroughs that have dramatically expanded our medical options. Unfortunately, Social Security was designed in 1935, when fewer lived to see the retirement age of 65. Only a fringe of visionaries believed that new technologies would push life spans close to 80 by the end of the century.
Nevertheless, it has happened. Retirement ages, though, have not adjusted, so Social Security is running on empty. Medicare may not have been designed to benefit the aged, but about half of all healthcare services are consumed by the five percent of the population that is dying. They are, it's no wonder, almost all older people.
These worsening fundamentals have not plateaued. The demographic pyramid, with large numbers of young payers and very few aged beneficiaries, is flipping. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I hope at least to convince you that I'm not in denial about the problems we face. Therefore, I hope you'll take me seriously when I say that very recent scientific breakthroughs are more than capable of solving our entitlement and debt crises.
The End of Cancer as a Deadly Threat
Last week, an announcement was made by BioTime Inc. that could quickly cut the cost of cancer in half, saving in excess of $100 billion annually. This breakthrough is not a cancer treatment. It is a revolutionary diagnostic technology.
To understand why it is so important, we need to understand that cancer isn't a single disease at all. The medical term is "malignant neoplasm," which encompasses any condition of uncontrolled cell growth. There are hundreds if not thousands of different types of malignant neoplasms, and many have almost nothing in common with any of the others.
This has made cancer diagnostics very inefficient, though it is a multi-billion-dollar industry. A test for prostate cancer, for example, won't detect breast cancer. Even current breast cancer tests don't detect all breast cancers.
If all the existing diagnostics were used to test one individual for early-stage cancers, it would cost many tens of thousands of dollars – perhaps more. If all people were checked for all cancers on a regular basis using existing diagnostics, it would bankrupt our entire healthcare system.
To make matters even worse, many diagnostics are notoriously inaccurate. Some miss as many as half of cancers but return extremely high false positives that have their own costs. False-positive PSA (prostate-specific antigen) tests, for example, generate unnecessary biopsies, surgery, impotence, incontinence, and other problems. Some diagnostic procedures, I might add, are also extremely unpleasant.
As a result, most people are tested for cancers only when there is reason to believe they may have the disease. Most diagnostics are used, therefore, to gain information about existing and problematic cancers, not to detect them before they become a problem.
As a result, many cancers are not found until they are sadly well-established and aggressive. It is an oft-repeated truism in oncology that early detection translates into far more successful treatment. Early detection also dramatically reduces the costs of therapy.
What we need, obviously, is a simple blood test that would, with high accuracy, find cancers in their early stages. Combined with revolutionary new cancer therapies that are just around the corner, we would see the end of most catastrophic cancers. Even with existing therapies, the impact on lives and healthcare budgets would be enormous.
Moore's Law, Bioinformatics, and Genomics
Over the last few years, I've written often about BioTime's ACTCellerate program, one of the most important projects in contemporary science. Dr. Michael West and BioTime scientists are decoding and cataloging the genetic changes that occur in human cells as they progress from their original embryonic state.
To accomplish this monumental task, BioTime scientists rely on large-scale genomic analysis and bioinformatic analysis of the data, using increasingly powerful computers. Thus far, BioTime scientists have mapped over 40,000 gene sequences expressed in different cell types.
This information will allow BioTime to turn a few of your blood cells into induced pluripotent cells, and then into any type of cell you need. Those cells will be completely rejuvenated and functionally young. Already, BioTime's ReCyte Group is on track to reverse age-related cardiovascular and immune-system conditions.
However, the knowledge and tools that the company has created have far more uses than hacking cellular codes. BioTime used the same tools to examine hundreds of adult cell types, both normal and cancerous. In the process, they discovered that many genes being activated in cancers had never before been associated with malignant neoplasms.
Genes express proteins that can be easily detected. (A simple consumer version of a protein detector, by the way, is the home pregnancy test.) And having identified the genes activated by the most-common cancers, it was a relatively simple process for BioTime to design a blood test for the proteins expressed by those genes.
This is off-the-shelf technology. Many medical device companies manufacture diagnostic devices that identify proteins in blood. But early in-house tests found that BioTime's prototype was more accurate in terms of identifying cancer-free individuals than is commonly observed in PSA cancer tests. This discovery convinced the company to prioritize development of the technology.
BioTime's commercial cancer-detection device will probably be priced no higher than existing diagnostics that test for only one type of cancer. I expect the device will detect a wide range of cancer types, including cancers of the breast, lung, bladder, uterus, stomach, and colon, as well as others.
My guess, looking at wholesale prices for similar laboratory devices, is that the cost in materials for testing an individual for a broad spectrum of the most-common cancers will eventually be no more than $15. It is impossible to predict the size of the market for a simple broad-spectrum cancer detection test, because no such diagnostic exists; but the potential is huge.
[The test itself should retail for about $100 in the beginning (with the price falling over time), giving the company extremely healthy margins. Which means they can do even more research. BioTime CEO Mike West is one of the most driven men I know, but he is also a genuinely nice guy and soft-spoken gentleman, not given to hyperbole.]
The von Eschenbach Connection
This is a true disruptive technology and its impact will be noticeable both in terms of average life expectancy and healthcare costs. The announcement explains why, several months ago, Andrew von Eschenbach, Ph.D., joined the board of BioTime.
I've long considered BioTime the leader in the field of regenerative medicine. I was nevertheless puzzled when von Eschenbach joined the team. His resumŽ includes former jobs such as commissioner of the FDA during George W. Bush's term and director of the National Cancer Institute. He is considered by many to be the leader in the fight against cancer. In 2003, when he was director of the National Cancer Institute, von Eschenbach announced his goal of eliminating suffering and death due to cancer by 2015.
His motive for working with BioTime is now obvious. I've spoken to him since then, and he's confirmed that he believes the BioTime pan-cancer diagnostic will have an enormous impact as soon as it is widely implemented. Moreover, he believes subsequent applications of the technology have the potential to deliver true personalized medicine with extremely effective therapies specifically tailored for individual patients.
Von Eschenbach's goal of reducing cancer to an irritation rather than a killer is achievable – even if his time frame was off. It might not be that inaccurate, however, as BioTime has chosen to go first for European approval of the CE marking process . As approval of devices in Europe is much faster than it is the US, we could see the test on the market there before the end of 2014. Many countries outside of Europe take their lead from the EU, so it should move rapidly into Canada and other markets. With post-market data from these nations, I would expect that approval in the US would take as little as one additional year.
Then, because early detection of the most common cancers would be simple and inexpensive, insurance companies would find it in their own financial interest to encourage routine PanC-Dx testing, as BioTime is calling their technology. Because physicians are already familiar with this type of testing, market penetration will not require overcoming a learning curve. Cancer rates and costs will begin to fall dramatically.
That, however, is only the beginning of the story. Simultaneously, a raft of next-generation cancer therapies will be coming to market.
Though I've already tested your attention span, I'd really like to give you just a brief overview of some of the most exciting new drugs coming to oncology. These are drugs so far beyond anything you've seen yet, they make current treatments seem medieval by comparison.
[John here. I talked with BioTime's Mike West last week, and he is very charged up about the cancer tests. But then we talked at length about the challenges facing his regenerative medicine work. He is still optimistic, and progress is being made. The regen work is my interest and why I own a small number of shares. I also agree with Pat about the inclusion of Andy von Eschenbach, whom I have met several times and really like. He is a very impressive and focused researcher.]
Bexion Therapeutics
Bexion, while still private, has attracted enormous attention where it matters. Their drug consists of a nanotech joining of two naturally occurring substances found in human cells. Together, they have the ability to exploit one of the few characteristics that all cancer cell share, the transfer of phosphatidylserines to cell wall exteriors to fend off immune response.
When the Bexion drug is administered, these nano-probes seek out phosphatidylserines and collect on the surface of cancer cells. There they trigger natural cell suicide, or apoptosis. Cancers die but healthy cells are unharmed.
Bexion's drug has been shown effective in preclinical tests against an extraordinary range of cancers. Moreover, its seek-and-destroy mechanism could make it an ideal diagnostic tool for use in conjunction with BioTime's broad-spectrum blood test. Because a marker can be attached to the Bexion drug, it is possible to light up cancers using scanning technology, giving doctors a 3D view of neoplasms.
Most remarkably, in animals testing, Bexion's drug appears to somehow bypass the blood-brain barrier. This makes it a most promising candidate for treatment of brain cancers, which are among the most lethal of cancer types. Clinical tests are expected to begin in 2012.
[There is a long story here, but I found this company through Pat as I was trying to help a friend find a possible cure for his young son's glioma (brain tumor). It was too early for human trials, but we became enamored with the technology and helped raise a small round of funds for the firm, including my own funds. I encourage you to go to http://www.bexionpharma.com/ and look around, click on the technology link, and see how the animal studies have progressed and why I am so excited about Bexion. Look at their boards and research. If you sit on the board of a foundation or charity that works with cancer-related issues, I urge you to take a deeper look, as each cancer must have its own trials, and the sooner we get started the sooner a cure can be approved. I am hopeful, and I think if you take an in-depth look you may share my optimism. You can contact the company from their website.]
Provectus Pharmaceuticals
Rose Bengal is an amazing molecule first used in the 1800s as a wool dye. Then it was employed as a diagnostic marker due to its unique ability to penetrate diseased or damaged cells but not healthy cells. In World War II it was used widely and successfully to protect soldiers from malaria, though it was never popular because it turned the whites of users' eyes blue.
In post-war Japan it was used as a food dye, and researchers discovered that humans and animals that consumed the most had the lowest cancer rates. Fast-forward to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, where scientists were fascinated by the molecule's remarkable electronic characteristics, as well as its ability to absorb and convert light and other low-level radiation.
Extensive "compassionate usage" of a modified Rose Bengal molecule has shown remarkable efficacy in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Phase II human clinical tests for liver cancer have been completed, with spectacular results. Preclinical indications show similar promise for other organs. Like Bexion's drug, these modified Rose Bengal molecules are dangerous only to cancer cells. I could go on.
Inovio Pharmaceuticals
Inovio is a leader in DNA vaccines. Using an extremely small electrical pulse, the company puts engineered DNA plasmids into cells. These circular rings of DNA utilize the body's own genetic mechanisms to manufacture RNA proteins that train and mobilize the immune system to attack various diseases, including cancers.
Inovio is in Phase II human tests for both leukemia and cervical displasia. Positive results in HIV and hepatitis-C show the adaptability of this technology for treatment of a wide range of diseases.
Galectin Therapeutics
Building on the work of one of the greatest Russian scientists of all time, Alexander Oparin, Galectin Therapeutics is the leader in an entirely new field of science known as glycoscience, which involves the use of complex carbohydrates – essentially foods – as drugs.
One of the deadly characteristics of cancer tumors is their ability to protect themselves by producing proteins that bind with sugars. These are galectin-3s, and tumors use them to create a lethal cloaking field that allows them to hide from our immune systems.
T cells have evolved to attack disease and pass information back to the thymus so specifically targeted T cells can be manufactured in large numbers. However, when T cells encounter a cancer's lethal galectin net, they are shut down and eventually die.
Galectin Therapeutics' naturally occurring plant sugars have the nearly unbelievable ability to protect and resurrect dying T cells. This makes their nontoxic carbohydrate drug, on its own, effective against cancers in general. In conjunction with cancer vaccines or drugs, however, it magnifies the effectiveness of the therapy to a quite astonishing degree.
Currently, the esteemed Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, the largest international nonprofit dedicated to conquering cancer, is funding Phase I/II clinical tests of a Galectin Therapeutics carbohydrate drug in conjunction with a melanoma vaccine. Oh, and by the way, this drug also appears to reverse the fibrosis that causes cirrhosis of the liver and subsequent liver cancers.
[I am on the board of directors of Galectin (GALT) and have a small position, which I have announced I intend to add to.]
In Conclusion
John Mauldin recently published a letter here that included the term catastrophic success. The banishment of lethal cancers provides us with an example. It will lengthen lives, reduce healthcare costs, and enrich investors. If, however, we do not come to grips with dramatically extended health spans, it could make our entitlement crisis far worse and eventually lead to complete national collapse.
As a society, we failed to heed the clear warnings regarding Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the mortgage and housing bubbles. Many of our so-called intellectuals are still pretending it didn't happen. Similarly, they are behaving as if the entitlement crisis is not serious.
Imminent cancer diagnostics and therapies, as well as breakthroughs in heart disease, Alzheimer's, liver disease, and more will give us the ability to grow our way out of the current financial mess. All we've got to do is stop pretending that a retirement age set in the 1930s makes an ounce of sense today.
Productive life spans will continue to lengthen and the costs of dying will be pushed back significantly. This will give us a window of opportunity to balance our budget. Then, regenerative medicine will really kick in, growing life spans even more rapidly.
These disruptive innovations will change everything. If exploited wisely, they will enable a period of unprecedented prosperity. If they are used to fund political fantasies, though, things will get much worse.
DNDN went from about $4 to $40 and came back down to $8. That is only a factor of 10. Nothing goes up by a factor of 100, that is why one must not let the stock price to horrendously undervalued levels.
We are not suggesting that they impoverise themselves in the process of buying this stock. Can they not spend say 15 days salary to protect the destruction of this share price. Their owneship of this stock is probably their biggest investment, of the order of tens of millions of dollars for Diwan and Seymour. Can they not spend $50,000 to support their ownership of tens of millions of dollars. If they rfuse to do that what does it say about their assessment of that investment. That is what I am saying.
If they let the stock go to 20 cents the chances of it going back to $20 are very small. Show me one instance where a 20 cent stock was taken over for $20.
Seeker
I really do not think there is a hoax. I just wonder why the management does not mind such steep price drops. If they do mind, why not do some insider buying? After all this steep price drop effects them the most.
Seeker
We all have to decide when to move on. I personally bought into this stock based on Seymour's talk about how much he believed in the technology. Recently I am coming to the conclusion that he may very well be just talking to lure in more investors. In fact his belief in the technology may not be strong. I am saying this because he has refused to support the stock when it went down so hard. Not only that they decided to another deal with Seaside when the stock price was too low knowing full well the result of that deal.
Another problem I see is that they keep calling Seaside deals an investment knowing full well that it is not. Seaside deal has a specific clause saying that there can be no restrictions of selling by Seaside. So calling Seaside deal an investment is a white lie.
Some more of this and I will have to move on. Fortunately, I can take some losses since I have large gains in Neoprobe. I would have been a large investor in this company but looks like I cannot have faith in the management. I am still here watching, but not for too long. I am sure there are many investors like me. No wonder the stock price is where it is.
If one cannot have faith in management, one should not invest. After all if they are not putting their personal money in the stock even at such ridiculously low prices then there must be a reason. There is very little published about this technology. Who knows it may all be a hoax.
Seeker
I fully agree with you. Seymour should step up and buy, but he has not. Makes one wonder if all his talk is just for show. Why always say I have great faith in this technology but never back up words with real money. Even a small buy like $50,000 will work wonders to support the stock price.
Well, that may happen. Anytime a big pocket comes to support us the need for money disappears, they fund it.
They do need funding. It is very clear that we do not have the funding to go through upto phase 3. The need may not be now, but it is definitely there. Your assumption is that we do have the goods and the stock price will recover. Do not believe in any such gaurantee. In most cases serious price appreciation happens during NDA filing. That happens only after phase 3 is successsfully complete. Until everything is complete it is best for management to support the stock price since the need to raise money is always there for smaller biotechs who do not have support from major players with big pockets. If they cannot raise money they must forget being able to complete all the phases. There are multiple problems on the way.
We have the goods is a wrong hypothesis because if it was absolutely clear that we do have them we would already have a big pocket company supporting us, not Seaside selling.
Seeker
We made multiple requests to management to make a few insider buys to support the stock price. We have seen multiple insider sells, for example Diwan to raise money for manufacturing facility buildout. But we have not seen a single insider buy. Looks like by not making any insider buy despite repeated calls the management has decided that the stock price is not low enough and they do not see any reason to spend their precious personal money on this stock. Management cannot conduct insider buy or sells at all times. However, they just came out with a significant news release and should be able to buy or sell now.
I think the management will regret this decision since this market is ruthless and wherever they do not find a very good reason to keep stock price up, the market belives in selling first and worrying later. The result will be that we will see the stock price continue to drop. Management will suffer along with us since they have very large amount of shares. The only way to reverse this will be for them to let the stock price go to hell, then do huge reverse stock spilt, and then award themselves huge options again. All this is not very easy to do and will seriously hamper their abiility to raise money later. I am very sad to see the management not support the stock.
Puffer had mentioned that some big biotech investors are interested in NNVC. Recent trading shows some confirmation of big players getting in the game. In the morning we see big downslides on heavy volume (Seaside?) and then we see recovery pushing us into positive region at heavy volume (big biotech buyers?).
Seeker
Looks like the small biotech selloff continues.
As long as they want to build a position less than 2 weeks of Seaside conversion, that is
$400K = $400K*1.15/.61 shares = 754K shares
Essentially close to 1 million shares. So if they want to build a position of 1 million shares or less, it would not cause any price spike. Ask them to just create a bid like 200K shares for $0.61 and Seaside will be happy to fill the bid. No need to chase the price like buying several lots of 50K shares at ask etc.
As the price of stock drops, Seaside buys become huge in number of shares. Can you believe Seaside would be looking to unload 750K shares every two weeks. No way it is possible in this market without causing price devastation.
Seeker
This stock looks destroyed pricewise. When a major news cannot move it, it just simply means all demand has died off. In my opinion this is the result of
(1) Continuing selling by Seaside
(2) Inability of the management to show personal faith in the stock by insider buying
When a stock price is destroyed in this manner there is only one way to recover. That is for the mangement to show that they do believe in the stock's potential and are ready to support it with their own personal funds. That will mean a need to buy some stock in the open market.
If the managers who have such large stock options and stock holdings do not think that the stock has appreciation potential, why should investors believe that the stock will go up? Just making verbal statements that we see huge potential in the technology does not cut it because investors are skeptical that management may be making up those words to be able to keep the stock price up. The mangement should place some of their own maney at stake by buying stock in the open market.
The current management has huge position in this stock, in both options and stocks. If they do not start insider buying this stock price could crash. That will be a bigger loss to the management than to us since they have much larger holdings than we do.
The argument from management may be we have millions of free stock and options and already own a huge positions, what difference will a few more shares bought in the open market make to my stock ownership. This is a valid argument. If somebody has 10 million shares and buys 100K shares in open market, his holding becomes 10 million hundred thousand, which is almost the same as original holding. However, when management buys the stock in the open market it makes a very different statement to the investors. It says that the management is sure that this stock will go up and that is why they spent their hard earned money to buy the stock. The other millions of shares were free stocks for which the management got without much effort. Those millions of shares will be useful if this stock goes up but will be meaningless if we flounder dowmn to pennies in stock price.
So I urge them management to pony up some money for insider buys. It is for the good of the company and all investors. If this stock keeps going down like this we will all lose:
(1) Mangement since their millions of shares will not be worth much in cash
(2) Company since it will be harder to raise money later
(3) Obviously we investors in NNVC.
Seeker
Abbam,
Dr. Diwan has sold NNVC stock in 2011 so that he could finance the construction of a facility needed to produce the cides. This plan was covered in a press release before the stock sales took place. This facility is needed before NNVC can start the FDA trials. The scheme to finance the facility through Diwan's stock sales was decided by the company as the most cost effective way to get the facility constructed.
Seeker
Sarshee, Where do you get this idea about $1 price by Seaside? There is no such provision. The only minimum is that they do not get any shares below 20 cent stock price.
Seeker
Yesterday Seaside was able to unload some of their shares. In between our volume was so low that Seaside had to buy shares from NNVC, but had no opportunity to sell them in a very weak market. Yesterday the volume was decent and my estimate is that Seaside unloaded about 500K shares. Think about it, who else would sell in the 70 cent range? Most of us have very high hopes on this company and have bought shares mostly at higher prices, so none of us would take a loss and sell shares at a loss on a day when very good news came out. Seaside on the other hand has been collecting shares for 1 1/2 months, they had to sell yesterday since they make a profit even when selling at such depressed prices. Seaside selling caused the shares to eke out only a minor gain yesterday on the back of such good news.
This is the reason I have not liked the recent Seaside agreement. It is one thing to sell shares in the market when the stock is strong, it is quite a different matter to keep selling at such depressed prices. Such relentless selling will destroy the stock price. I would have preferred if management had given say 3 months for the stock price to recover well above $1 and then sold more through Seaside.
The doctors will suffer with stock price drop because they are the biggest owners of this stock. When the stock is at $1 they have much more equity then when it is at say 50 cents. We may lose $100K, they would lose $10 million, just because they have so many shares. As a percentage they may not lose any because their shares were obtained at zero prices (or close) so whether the shares are at $1 or 50 cents, the gain for them is 100% in both cases. However, they are human beings and look at their holdings in dollars not as a percentage gain.
Seaside loses in rapid price drops because it is unable to sell the stock in time and gets stuck with it.
Seeker
I agree with what you say, DFG. In my opinion Seaside also suffers when stock price drops rapidly as it has done recently. My best guess is that they have sold at least 70% of the shares they have bought. The advantage they have is that they get 15% discount to market prices. It is possible that their plan is to sell 85% of the shares so that they can then sit on the free 15%. However, it is also possible that they sell all they get. To think of Seaside as long term investor is faulty, they are in this game to make quick money. This opinion is based on the really murky companies that Seaside has invested in.
The ones who have a real interest in NNVC are us long term investors. However, our buying at this level will not help NNVC stock price, none of us have the capability to buy millions of shares. Seymour better step in and buy some shares in the open market so that it shows his confidence in the company's technology and also so that a floor is put under the stock price.
Seeker
Proof that Seaside is not a long term investor:
(1) Seaside has bought a lot of shares, maybe 20 million shares so far, but still does not have more than 5% of outstanding shares (about 8 million shares). If they had more than 5% they would have to file with SEC. So where do you think the shares went? Clearly they were sold. What more proof is needed?
(2) look at the companies that Seaside has invested in. Do you think Seaside is a big institutional investor which invests in companies in Biotech, oil drilling, technology, mining and even in companies on the verge of bankruptcy in shady businesses? They do not invest in any, they just buy and sell. Any other idea is ridiculous.
What makes you think that Seaside wants to invest in NNVC for long term. Please give us any proofs you may have.
I am saying that rasing addition $5M at below $1 prices in my opinion was a very bad move. It is management which has to decide what move they need.
However, if Seymour will not buy some stock in the open market at these depressed prices, I would be very upset.
Nano Could you please explain this post a bit more. I do not understand it fully.
Seeker