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 must say, I am LOL also and glad I could help out with JBI Inc.
I may seem and sound like a real idiot at the moment, but JBI needed this, if only for a brief moment. I would not expect anything I or anyone else says here or on any other board would really make any true difference in anything, especially the actual long term performance of a company like JBI or any other for that matter.
I have never been an antagonist in my life, and I will certainly limit myself so as not to become addicted or a sore with the good hearted persons that reside here.
I just might research JBI a little closer. You just might be surprised what I might be able to contribute in this particular area of technology in a positive way.
Well, back to reading the translations of Sun Tu, once again.
Hydrocarbons are fun, I will grant you that!
Good luck to all JBI longs....as long as it is related to JBI that is.
Wishing all the best of good buys.
HS
Thanks for the informative response.
It looks a lot like the logic I have used elsewhere. It is a shame that positive results are not viewed on an equal basis.
Best of luck to all longs!
Wishing all the best of good buys!
Why can't they process it? Is it a feedstock conditioning problem or an intermediate stage issue. Some of these things can be solved if they could get the right expertise on it.
What is the fuel final Chlorine content? That is another rather big question that will dictate if stationary sources will need to add post processing equipment like spray drier absorbers dry sorbent injection systems with after collection to meet the next round of EPA clean air regulations.
When the fuel is combusted, what are the fluegas stream VOC and HAPS consitutents? Do downstream selective catalytic deNOx reactors have any catalyst deterioration issues. Catalysts costs can get into the millions and disposal is also an issue. I doubt the catalyst space velocity would be too much a problem as smaller combustion systems this would apply to have some benifits that can off-set the performance issue.
Has the company put out any data on this?
Just curious.
JBI Inc down 95% and we are supposed to believe it gets better than that.
Well, the old optimist in me says if its as bad as it can get, there is sure to be a brighter tomorrow!
Not holding my breath!
Or they could have a real bonafide product like the Wright Bros.
JBI is built on a cardboard platform, destined to fail once wet.
Pacific Health wants out!
Looks pretty bad to me.
I would look for a 30% drop in share price from here!
Uh OH!
Failure?!? JBI Inc is based on failure.
What are they hiding from us and why?
That is the bigger questions!
Red Flag for sure!
Boy has this stock tanked!
Whats wrong?
What don't we know!
What are they hiding?
It is a shame you, others and NNVC management have take so much time ensuring your statement regarding NNVC are not misused.
NNVC is a valid developmental stage company with products of good demonstrated efficacies.
I will rely on actual real news concerning NNVC and not interpretations of either here or there. I would recommend others do also, but it is clearly a personal choice. I have been holding NNVC for a long time and weathered its ups and downs. I think the next 24 months will be the most interesting and I am more than willing to ride the waves that NNVC (just like many other companies) will have to navigate over that period.
NNVC has a wonderful track record in demonstrating the efficacy of their therapeutics. I agree with some of the concerns over timetables and execution proficiencies. But all in all, I believe the tox studies will get done, maybe later that I would have liked, I also believe NNVC will get to human phase studies. I have no problem waiting for that as I am fairly certain we will see that end within the next 24 months. While that might sound like a long time, it really is not. I have personally worked on R&D projects that have gone on for many years and seen the 24 month end-game scenario come subsequent to those many years of work. In retrospect, that period went in what seemed like a flash.
I also think we will see more secondary confirmations from the world class research from Dr. Eva Harris and also from Europe's world class investigators like ViroClinics coming in the meantime.
That will be real information you can count on. Between now and then, NNVC will likely undergo a lot of volatility. If someone is a trader, then that presents opportunity. I am not much of an active trader, and have no problem relaxing with a nice cold beer in the meantime.
Good luck to all those out there who might share my honest assessment.
As usual, wishing all the best of good buys!
HS
Regarding NNVC I might change a little wording, but not much!
Thanks for setting the record straight about NNVC and is principals.
Best regards!
I will second that! I have trained Chinese in our technology. In meeting with them, individually they are some of the nicest people I have ever met. Collectively, they are like the Borg!
I cant name any that went from 0.33 to 1000, but there were a lot that certainly went up significantly. Many of them did not have that revolutionary of a product like NNVC. MSFT did in a way and it went from 0.07/share to 39/share. I'll take that!
I will take these others as well
QSII from 1 to 48
BJRI from 1 to 35
SIRO from 0.27 to 68
MNST from 0.70 to 70
CNQR from 0.31 to 107
PIR from 0.11 to 21
GGP from 0.59 to 32
AXL from 0.40 to 20
There are many more, some more phenomenal, I just don't have the time to delineate them. But I will take the average of the above any day.
88% is just a near term valuation. They suggest much higher. I am also rather impressed by their conservative analysis approach with their 48 month total scenario time. Based recent information from the company, I have indicated I think we are 12-24 months out from some real big, very big upward price movements well beyond 10/share. Your 8000+% could easily happen within their total 48 month time horizon.
I think NNVC is also correct about the timeline once in human trials to be shorter than typical drug investigation phases. I don't think the report has that factored in too much.
Best of luck to all NNVC longs. You are all some of the nicest and respectable persons I have found on any internet message board.
NNVC Recent Valuation Shows 88% Upside Potential
Today we have an EXCELLENT independent Un-Biased analysis of NNVC, clearly stating and justifying a near term 88% upside potential by a reputable investment research firm.
Nothing at all like the low quality anonymous self-serving shorts as can be found in the case of Seeking Alpha type articles.
It includes the positive and negatives and gives the company very high overall potential considering all the aspects.
It is very nice to see such an un-biased report on both the validity of NNVC technology and its overall market potential both near and long term.
Excellent investment modeling is also included in the report,
Reference the link below for the full un-biased report and analysis:
http://media.wix.com/ugd/a15970_9367d43bb865419bbe4863a7eaba92c8.pdf
It is an excellent read and is likely to be just an example of the research and coverage releases to come.
More institutional investments likely as firms wake-up to NNVC and both their short and long term potential.
The report is highly detailed and of excellent quality.
It is refreshing to see an honest analysis of this sort.
NNVC has 88% near term upside potential
For complete information - Reference the attached EXCELLENT overall analysis of the company, which includes all negative potential elements. Very nice to see and un-biased report on both the validity of NNVC technology and its overall market potential both near and long term.
Excellent investment modeling also included!
http://media.wix.com/ugd/a15970_9367d43bb865419bbe4863a7eaba92c8.pdf
Oh yes. More to come. See Link regarding NNVC
http://media.wix.com/ugd/a15970_9367d43bb865419bbe4863a7eaba92c8.pdf
Yes, I think they are quite serious. Just like NNVC's institutional investors are!
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201403270900BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5432&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
NNVC is a great company with great product potential.
It has challenges to say the least. Some presented by its operations, but most due to outside reasons and the rigid industry protocols it must follow.
Some also just by the nature of today's investment environment.
Do your own research!
Best of luck to all new investors!
http://www.nanoviricides.com/
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201402180700BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5756&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20140327-908238.html
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201403050700BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5718&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201402040700BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5723&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1379006/000114420414009813/v367879_10q.htm
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201403120700BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5489&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201403270900BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5432&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201403240700BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW5548&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://republicanrealestateagent.com/why-message-board-bashers-bash-stocks/
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/stocks/news/press_release.asp?docTag=201402111329BIZWIRE_USPRX____BW6500&feedID=600&press_symbol=95414
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1379006/000114420414009813/v367879_10q.htm
Incorrect.
If someone never really tries to climb mount Everest, it is misleading/erroneous to state they never failed. Saying I have never failed to stand on the moon is also a nonsensical statement.
NNVC has never failed in the efficacy tests they have actually performed to date. Each has shown clear effectiveness of their therapeutic candidates against the viral types targeted.
Which it just might within 24 months!
That is not untypical of many development stage companies that eventually made it to the stratosphere.
It is a temporal occurrence.
Best of luck. Stay independent.
Thanks for the update on coverage.
NNVC has not been on the AMEX for too long yet. We will see more of this to come.
Great News. Today's fair of over $7.21 per share sounds very close to what I have estimated. More when more data from Eurpore is in and much more when success of the tox studies are in and much much more when the IND is filed and we are one to human phase studies.
Quite the opposite!
It has never failed!
Please stop promulgating deliberate misinformation.
Thank you.
Agree. Good post.
The biggest risk with NNVC is not the technology, the efficacy or the toxicity. It is as you stated;
'If they take too long, they (and we) become irrelevant'
Incorrect, the only problem is that it would be against established protocols. It is too bad. I think some things are simply worth the risks. In this case, I think the risks would be extremely low and the rewards would be extremely high. It is too bad for the development of life saving technology this is impractical to be made to happen today.
I honestly volunteer to be injected with flucide right now. I would sign any required waiver. If in anyway such a thing could be possible, I have no problem doing it.
I would agree NNVC was overly optimistic with these types of projections. Finally, at least one of your posts has some reasonable use of the facts. It is simply too bad it is the only one. Actually, it is good it is the only one.
The positive is that many of their required milestones to get toward an IND have actually been achieved. While their results and milestones to date have not come as fast as I would like, the results that have been achieved are excellent.
I have said before that I think Tox studies wont be completed until sometime in 2015. The IND and phase I should occur shortly after.
The LD50 is a classic toxicity value that is the dose that consistently causes death in 50% of the population. It is the most common basic definition level of toxicity. That is why NNVC references it.
If NNVC can’t find an LD50 value, that is EXCELLENT!
They can’t even find an LD10 or less, like LD01!
No NNVC material has shown to kill anything but its target.
The L50 is the classic most standard value used to measure basic toxicity. You can have an LD10, LD90 or LD100, or others for example.
For NNVC to state they have yet to find the LD50 in no way means they kill 50% or any % of the animals. To suggest that it is, is a pure misrepresentation of the scientific definition of the LD scale used in toxicity studies.
For an efficacy example, they gave humanized mice 1000x the LD100 dose of the flue virus. That is 1000x the dose needed to ensure death in 100% of the population.
After giving them a drug candidate, efficacy is measured by how long it takes to die at such high tremendous doses of the virus. NNVC's FluCide extended the lifetime far beyond Tamiflu. Using Tamiflu, they all died as would still be expected. With the FluCide, many actually survived......That is AMAZING EFFICACY!
I would be glad to be injected with some tomorrow if you or NNVC could possibly arrange it.
So you dont remember the stock pump in the 90s where the person used Dan Marino's name as well as other cases of prosecuted fraud on the pump side either. Liability does indeed work both ways.
Oh well. I cant help that. I have a lot of research to continue on with for a lot of other topics and activities going on. I cannot be responsible for short or non-existent memories in the minds of others.
NNVC will have its day.
It is also late on a Sunday by the way. GIAR!
No of course not.
It would be because of securities fraud. If he or she shorted, then sent the article and attempted to profit, that could carry some heavy consequences.
NNVC will be have its say. We will just have to wait and see what becomes of it.
BTW, please don't take this wrong, but are you actually proud of your Q&A example of how you use today's technology?
Or they are just too full of themselves and might get into more trouble. Reposting it like that after known legal contention should put them in a direct libel position themselves. I hope they have to pay millions to NNVC!
Jail time for the pumpinator would also be highly appreciated by the community of honest investors.
In my opinion, ISCO
is a very interesting situation that is mostly likely significantly undervalued.
I think the only problem is the need for dilution to keep things funded and moving for at least a little more time to come. I also think the last offering so low surprised a few. I surely felt they were worth a little more than that.
Overall though, they are not in a terrible position at all. Hopefully with positive Parkinson results reported in full, then some future funding might come at a better price to the company.
They really need to push past 12 million in sales without increasing their G&A more. I think the cell culture media is a great product area they appear to be entering successfully. It is very much prone to repeat business for the reasons stated by management, i.e. – maintaining testing consistency.
I agree with your comparisons to some others, but the world of corporations is unfair and inconsistent with transients.
My opinion is the company is worth at least a dollar a share right now if properly valued, and when an IND is underway, much more. If the human phase tests go well, much much more.
With the markets giving it away at less than 30 cents, it seems like a screaming buy to me. Especially with the full primate Parkinson test results coming very shortly and the IND really not that far away.
That is because it is really only 6 months as their funding philosophy is to maintain 18 months of funding in the bank to prevent any issues of sudden or near-term insolvancy.
I always take 18 months off the time and assume that if they have 24 months of funding in the bank, that I might expect a new round to obtain about another 6 months to 12 months maximum funding in about 6 months.
That would fall directly within their stated principles and guidance and is a very responsible and conservative logical funding schedule approach. Once again, they are only doing what they say they are doing.
I see it as a plus and indicative of a company trying to manage funding with operations cost while planning for solvency and limiting the size of their requests at the same time. They are indeed being extremely responsible!
Until they start selling the drugs or technology, they will be in this mode as most other development companies are.
That is not too bad actually. Just as the letter to shareholders explained. Not bad at all. I think a lot of companies would pay under 60 million for the results they achieved to be in their pocket instead of NNVC's. Sure, it would be nice to be able to do all tht with 10 million or less, but show me someone else that can do it with the 58 million over 4 - 5 years.
BTW, that has nothing to do with the post replied to.
I read the letter to shareholders again, and I think I am even more impressed the second time around.
Besides the collaborations with the world leading infectious disease research test centers, universities and laboratories, all reporting great results, the discussion of history and management operating practice, as well as the timelines and costs impressed me even more than the first read.
About all I can fault NNVC for at the moment is being a little too optimistic with prediction of milestone dates. The overwhelming dominant plus is they have actually accomplished much of what they set out to do. I also agree that 2005 was not that long ago and the average burn rate to reach the significant milestones achieved to date is probably at par with the best in the industry.
I think they are still too optimistic for final tox report and phase I start. I am betting the fall of 2015. Some earlier offshore trials might be in there, but I would bet early 2015 for that at best.
Regarding costs, I fully appreciate the outsourcing matter. On many of the R&D projects I managed, I found it very difficult to work within a reasonable budget and go too far beyond your immediate in-house capabilities. Even working with all inside resources, the cost of doing anything these days is high. Once you went outside, you ran into IP protection concerns, added legal costs for confidentiality agreements, non-disclosure agreements, etc. You had to spend a lot to pay the outside source plus the cost of time documenting information transfers. Costs skyrocketed from internal project management time, trip costs, leading to more costly status reviews. If you have a manufacturing process, outsourcing that had similar problems. Both were often held hostage to schedule and timeline disruptions from the provider that could easily get complciated by your own. More time was spent trying to keep your finger-on-their-button than doing good value added work. Often, it was an absolute pain in the butt!
The letter describes what I feel is a realistic view of how things can evolve. It also illuminates the happenstance type navigations that occur when an opportunity presents itself. For example, I think, in hindsight, they could probably have FluCide in human trials right now, if they did not dilute their efforts by working on as many other viral types. Yet, this is not a net negative at all. Their resounding success in these tests yield excellent associated support and leave them prepared for a very quick expansion of the actual ‘to-market’ pipeline.
My biggest concerns are IP dominance and competition.