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.
thanks for the link. it's not always easy to be a skeptic...
The stock price indicates that your conclusion is completely off base.
yawn.
as you know, patents are only valuable if they protect IP that generates cash.
everything except volume, share price, clinical hold, major dilution...
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23.1 and an Order of the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey (the
"Court"), that the above-captioned stockholder derivative action (the "Action"), is
being settled (the "Settlement") on the terms set forth in the Stipulation of
Settlement dated as of October 2, 2017 (the "Stipulation").
they are crooks.
Or they go bust and shareholders get zero.
All publicly available information (for a company that supposedly cures cancer) reconciles to $1.80/share. Think about it...
800K covered and the price went down. What does that tell you?
merck's keytruda
The robot who wrote that obvious piece of garbage is not to be trusted.
with whose money?
It's day in bankruptcy court?
Did they mention if the price target took into consideration the probable upcoming reverse split?
10x current market cap? No way.
Your shares were returned last week right after a dilutive offering. Think that's coincidence?
Why would they extend the warrants? If they let them expire they'll have 3 million extra shares (is that the right number?) to sell in the next dilution (which will again be far below $5/share).
Four years from now? hahahaaha!
Thanks for the clickbait.
Why would the company extend warrant expiration? To bail out losing trades? Unethical and probably illegal.
BTW, dilution is dilution whether it's from warrant excercise or other.
You've described a criminal conspiracy. If the technology works, why bother taking such a risk? Is the technology also a scam?.
You're overthinking it. Management is simply a bunch of incompetent hacks.
Umm, because they are incompetent bufoons.
Obviously they have no respect for the common shareholder.
You'd probably make more money if you shorted ALL companies developing putative cancer cures.
Especially, underfunded ones, ones who have a reverse split in their history, and the ones who had a clinical setback.
Mental note: Find time machine. Short ADXS.
Most places would fire the people associated with such a blunder. ADXS gives out retention bonuses.
Right. IP has a limited shelf life. Lives potentially hang in the balance.
Your logic only works if you assume there aren't a billion outstanding shares when the gains from NEO or HOT are recognized.
Besides you could still benefit in the form of CVR's or by investing in the purchaser.
You'd hope so right? Managing cash/capital/funding is job one for any small biotech. Seems like ADXS has mismanaged it though.
"a deal is coming because one is obviously needed"
Really? Is that how the world works?
Perhaps you could elaborate.
Right. Some companies box out shareholders with dilutions (or stock based compensation (I'm looking at you Cisco)) to the extent that marketcap increases are only enjoyed by employees.
This is why I voted "No" on everything but the accountants. Force a sale.
in what sense?
because they need walking around money for leverage. right, iggy?
hahaha
right you are.
everyone except management gets screwed if they can't get there from here.
always.
the results are already in, iggy. look at the share price. multi-year low.
the obvious one.
There will be plenty of shares available to cover, with the upcoming private placement.
Wha?
what happened to the "partnership deal or deals to negotiate" that they wouldn't sell shares six months ago but should now?
First, they don't have zero additional authorized shares.
Second, If they were going to do it (raise money through dilution), they should have done so six months ago, instead of painting themselves into an increasinly tight corner.
This logic assumes one potential partner.
plenty of management teams/employees have gotten rich post-bankruptcy,
That's a great example of a false analogy, Igster.