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 bought some in 2010 and today. Let's see how the share price does in 2012.
FYI - See the attached link. You need to be a member to get all the info. http://www.pdufadate.com/pdufa-dates/
I did buy some today! Rolled some other biostock gains into NNLX.
I would expect the first pop in share price once the FDA posts the product on it's agenda for review. Approval would be the game changer!
Yep- I would agree with your post. Is there information on the NNLX shareholder population? It would be interesting to know the profile, because it looks like the medium to smaller shareholders are not significantly adding to their position, yet the sellers of shares are clearly there and unloading. However if the company delivers all this interim discuss, debate and speculation becomes moot (but it's all we have for now).
Product moving forward, which is great! However the share price has moved very little. I don't get it. At a minimum I would have thought the existing shareholders would be buying up the shares and pushing the share price up. Do we know who are our major shareholders?
Nice price action and volume today!!! ITS ABOUT TIME!!!!
Phloam; if NNLX does an asset deal, in other words, it sells it's technology, audited accounts will not be required. If it's a share deal ; I would agree with you audited accounts will be required or prepared by the buyer.
Threes - good post. Sounds reasonable to me. Looks like management needs to find a balance between to much information and not enough IMO.
Hey Parents! To answer your question as to why I am a shareholder. I think the products are GREAT! (like Tony the Tiger). However, management not so much. In my view management is the area of risk. So if my concerns regarding management are in fact true I have a 50-50 chance on making money ( I'll take those odds). If my concerns turn out to be not real; then I have a 99 percent chance of a slam dunk. Thus I put management under a microscope or in this case a petri dish. I trade in the biotech space and have other pre-revenue companies in my portfolio in which management does an excellent job in reporting, updating it shareholders. You make it seem wrong to ask management to step up it's game. Do you have any critiques of management that you could share (without being ex-communicated and being ask to sit in the back of your church)? With the NNLX stock down over 20 percent for 2011; and yes I would venture to say it was a disappointing year. However I would agree with you 2012 is looking very promising.
Lock - if management did a much better job of communicating and reporting to the shareholders I would be in complete agreement with you. How much does it cost to issue PRs, quarterly business updates etc.. When I talk about having transprarency (audited financial statements) you mention the cost assoicated with it, and valid business reasons for holding off on them which is fine. So are there cost effective alternatives to audited financial statements that the company can use? I beleive the answer is YES; and has the company used any effectively - I beleive the answer is NO. IMO the share price of NNLX should be north of 2 bucks given where NNLX is in the FDA process. So what is keeping it down- I think its management's lack of communication. Lock- managment can communicate its finacial position on a timely basis and protect the "buttom line" they are not mutually exclusive.
Value; doing due dilly by leveraging your relationship within an organization is cool. However when you have a group of 50 or more shareholders (each thinking they are Warren Buffet) cold calling Battle; it leaves the vendor (Battle) very un-impressed with NNLX. Bret now has to do damage control with Battle and convience them that NNLX is not a Mickey Mouse organization with Goofy shareholders. In fact short sellers use that same approach to discredit a company with its vital vendor(s). Our concerns and issues should be taken up with management. Lastly, I would say cold calling any large organization does not insure you are getting the correct information from them. Try calling the IRS with a tax question; bet you will not get the right answer.
Agreed they are not required to issue audited financial statements. They are also not required to issue PRs, updates, have Shareholder meeting, etc.. I would like to see NNLX "up their game" as an organization. Just because you are a small company doesn't mean you must behave like one. Clearly there are lots of NNLX shareholders of that are happy with little or no communication but then they do something idiotic liking calling Battle to get information.
I agree with your valuation approach. Given where NNLX is in the FDA process I would have expect the stock price to be north of 2 bucks. IMO there are two major valuation adjustments that are keeping the stock price down. Yes it's a billion market but 1. How quickly will NNLX's market share ramp up? And 2. Are there any valuation surprises at NNLX or liabilities that will "spring up" upon FDA approval that management has not yet told the shareholders?
At this point in time I am more concerned about item 2 than item 1. I have been jumping up and down on the need for audited financial statements and it's not because I care about the revenue, expenses and cash on hand ( it would be nice to know) but the BIG value in the audited financial statements in a development company are the FOOTNOTES! The footnotes will address legal and structural ownership of NNLX's technology and whether that ownership has been impaired. For example, does Bret or a related company that he owns have options or similar agreement to purchase NNLX's technology at some point in the future? Are there consultancy or royalty agreements/revenue share agreements that have been already entered into that will "spring to life" post FDA approval that will impair or reduce NNLX's cash flow. Also the footnote address all significant related party transactions as well; which will assist in valuing the company.
Not having audited financial statement I believe is impairing the stock price of NNLX. If there is in fact no legal or structural surprises with NNLX we have a major buying opportunity for the shares and the price should clearly be above $2! If there are structural surprises, all bets are off.
Perhaps this is something to mention in the shareholder meeting.
"As such, NanoLogix does not control the timeline for the submission process" Threes - IMO NNLX is trying cover itself in the event of delays and as such manage expectation of timing. The first milestone is the filing of the application. The application itself is a complex process (the application is not 2 pages - it could be in the hundreds or thousands pages). Read Railsplitter's post; I think he has a reasonable assessment of timing.
Given the update to the webcite - it appears your speculation was on the money. June of 2012 looks more or more interesting.
Now that's an update! And a good move towards being transparent regarding reporting and information. Concerning your FDA approval before shareholder meeting comment; I would say let's focus on filing the application, which IMO is a major milestone, then give the FDA about 6 months. If the application is filed by the shareholder meeting that would be awesome and very impressive, however FDA approval would be unrealistic within that timeframe IMO.
Good post. Realistic assessment of where the company is at the moment.
LOL!!! sorry, Freudian slip on my part. I must have been thinking about the share price when I typed Burn instead of Barn!
Bret Bernhizer’s 2011 Annual Performance Review. Well folks I have been working on my year end performance review as well as my direct reports for 2011. So that got me to thinking; who does Bret’s annual review? Let’s think about this; he is the CEO, Chairman of the Board and is surrounded by family within the organization. So who challenges Bret’s from a strategy, leadership, product etc.. perspective? My guess is no one! As a shareholder of NNLX, I have decided to evaluate Mr. Bret on his 2011 performance. Below is a CEO review checklist with rating and my comments in bold. Please feel free cut and paste performance and do your own. So; since this board has been as boring as our share price; I am going to try spice things up around here. Please note this is a 2011 review and not a review of Bret’s entire career with NNLX.
RATINGS:
1 – DOES NOT MEET EXPECTATIONS – REQUIRES COACHING
2 – SOMETIMES MEETS EXPECTATIONS – DEVELOPING MANAGER
3 – MEETS EXPECTATION – STRONG PERFORMER
4 – EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS FREGUENTLY – ABOVE INDUSTRY PEERS
5- EXCEPTIONAL – EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS CONSITANTLY – INDUSTRY LEADER
• Leadership and excellence in customer fulfillment.
Rating – 2. No customers yet; however for 2011 shareholders are not happy with share price performance.
• Ability to achieve mission and specific board objectives.
Rating – N/A – I don’t know.
• Achieving medium-long term goals and key strategies.
Rating – 3. Bret has done a good job in promoting the products this past year as well as increasing their visibility.
• Ongoing and active communication with all board members and shareholders
Rating – 1. No shareholding meeting, no financial data and information on time line, milestones, strategy etc.
• Acquisition and ultilisation of market intelligence
Rating – 3.
• Attendance to board meetings and activities
Rating – 1. Other than product PR; shareholders are kept in the dark
• Development and management of resources, policies and systems
Rating – 2.
• Statutory reporting and compliance
Rating – 1. Major coaching required
• Ensure long term profit and commercial viability
Rating – 3. Has communicated to has cash for 2 years operations (FDA approval should come before that).
• Forge strong strategic relationships
Rating – 3. I like the additions to the SAB this past year.
• Delegation & authority
Rating – 2. Bret appears to be a micro-manager.
• Demonstration of personal qualities
Rating – 3
Overall Rating – 2.19 - Bret has done a good job this past year in the area a product awareness however given the share price performance is down 23%, as CEO he has not effectively communicated the milestones, FDA strategy and time line, and finally the financials.
Sitting quietly until management gives us something to chew on. You can speculate only so much. The ball is in their court and they are hogging it.
It appears that Amold and Porter would have the expertise to spearhead the filing process. The attorneys would do it for a fee; i guess Battle could charge a fee for the filing process. Hopefully management would enlighten us in the near future.
Thanks! Valuable solid info; especially the link. I would recommend attaching the link to the I-Hub information section under "FDA progress" or some similar heading. IMO NNLX management needs to do a better job of getting the word out on their progress within the FDA approval timeline; mark the key milestones in that timeline and celebrete through a PR when milestones are reached. As you know, when I don't take my meds, I tend the rant on management for lack of transparency, delays in shareholder meetings etc.. However if they were to issue a quarterly or even semi-annually PR updating the shareholders on FDA progress; I think that would go a long way. Also once NNLX receives apporval on one organism; getting approval on the others should be easier and I would expect "fast track" processing from the FDA.
Do you know what consulting firm will be/is preparing the FDA application and providing NNLX with advice on FDA process?
good post Rail. I have an item that if informations is available would like clarification. You mention in your post "More info about FDA approval and sales (all depends if we have FDA approval by this time)" am I correct to assume that the FDA application was filed and accepted by the FDA and the FDA gave NNLX an expected date of approval/completion of review? If this assumption is incorrect, where are we in the FDA approval process?
I would hope that at 5 bucks managements starts having audited accounts, get NNLX listed and throws the pink sheet status in the toilet! At 5 bucks I'm drinking the kool aid, admitting I was wrong about management (assuming its the same management and a buyout does not count), and I will write an apology note to Bret. But for now; they are on double sceret probation!
Oh NO! Parents! You drank the kool aid regarding my "don't drink the kool aid" comment! If we can't get on the same page regarding the medaphor "don't drink the kool aid" there is little hope for us to agree on most things. OK we don't agree on management, your fully vested and I am just not impressed at all (that could change; its not like I have passed final judegement). The one thing that we do agree on is that NNLX is sitting on a medical product with great potential both in terms of helping the population and its shareholders.
To answer the comment "why don't I sell my shares since I don't like management" - I haven't sold because I beleive the PRODUCT can overcome "Petro Boy's" slipping and sliding. In other words, its that strong of a product that I beleive management can't miss it up, except in two broad senarios;
A. Management is corrupt - ( I beleive this to be unlikely - not an issue or concern to date from my perspective)
B. Delay is getting Product to market allows competitors to bring an alternative product to market - thus shutting out NNLX. ( At this time, IMO, this managment risk is unlikely, only because I am unaware of anything else out there; however over time this could become a problem if delays are never ending.
So great product + no A or B issues = don't sell. I need to stop writing because I am getting emotional and will require medication.
IMO; its Parents and Rail that don't get it. Please don't drink any Kool-Aid before you read my reply. You guys are too emotional and investing is not about feeling sad or happy; it’s about calculations of benefits and risks. Each investor should do that often because it’s constantly changing. Spinning everything into a positive light without facts damages the share price and scares off more investor that you may believe (Hold on don't drink the Kool-Aid we are almost there!). As shareholders it ok to address risk assoicated with NNLX without having the need to sugar coat everything.
First, yes I paid to have the dishes tested and it’s everything that management claims!! Let me repeat it so it sinks in - NNLX has an awesome product with great potential; that is a fact according to my personal DD. So when I take issue with management; don't start talking about the product - (that the Kool-Aid talking)
So I mentioned the great upside that NNLX has; how about risk (I know what you are thinking OH NO Mr. Bill! he said risk, he must be a naysayer and he is going to be mean OH OH NOOO!) For this company to be successful it’s the product (we agree it’s awesome!) and management need to be good as well as relevant within its current lifecycle. Great Product + good management = Big Bucks for shareholders. I believe that you guys are sitting on some really nice appreciation on NNLX (I think that’s awesome - good for you) and as such you are satisfied with management, Bret. If you bought at .6 and its now .45 clearly for you management has delivered. However if you purchased in the last couple of years or you are looking to purchase now it’s not the same outcome ( I am taking about management only). The share price has not done well of late and it’s NOT because of the product. Shareholders should challenge management when economic activity is slow and not hang out in its rear end only to come out to address someone’s frustrations by putting a positive spin.
Notice the posting I replied to, it’s from about a year ago, NNLX let go of Sergey because NNLX was going into the production phase and in its lifecycle it grew out of the R&D guy. In that same vein is Bret capable of taking NNLX to the next level? Or has NNLX out lived him just like NNLX out lived Sergey?
So here is one of my big issues/the point of risk and perhaps WHY the share price has not moved; can Bret move this company from development (pink sheets) to production (listed). A year has passed and no PRODUCTION update, sales, costs etc.. Here is what the market sees regarding management - BIG BIG lack of transparency! If Bret demonstrates a capacity to deal with public shareholder's needs and concerns (ALERT ALERT that’s not your job!) via regular financial disclosures, updates, audited accounts and shareholder meetings the share price would be much higher, IMO. The biggest complain I get from investors and fund managers is that NNLX is a black hole when it comes to financial data and information. Bret is not a biotech guy he is an energy guy and that area of risk, IMO can be reduce via transparency, communication and shareholders meetings, etc . IMO, Bret needs to eliminate the penny wise pound fool cloud that is over him.
Finally as shareholders –I would say it’s ok to critique management. Also it’s ok to vent at management if they are moving to slow. Defending management at every turn, having excuses for them only damages the company’s share price and your creditability as an investor/shareholder. I am looking forward to seeing NNLX's CEO taking some steps as a polished biotech CEO in dealing with its public shareholders and greater investment community.
Thanks for clearing that up! I put too weight/consideration on SAB's activites and influence etc. RailSpitter in his comment to me; lead me to beleive the SAB was more than what it actually is.
Rail - I was busy craping on the management team that are employees. Yes the advisory board has lots of brain power, however they are not full time employees of the company- so their "skin" in the game can be debated. Furthermore they advise on product related items (as I stated earlier great product). It come back to management's wise used of its advisory board. Finally, please, please doesn't tell me that Jonathan Faro is on the NNLX Advisory Board! Isn't he the one that is run the tests in Texas? That would be a serious conflict of interest and I will sink into a lower level of sadness. BUT I shouldn't be surprised managemnt does has a clue when it comes to "conflicts of interest" FYI - FDA is all over "conflicts of interest".
Good post! You should be on the Advisory Board!
Yep - I agree its sad. Also you mention "We are on the verge of submitting for FDA approval for at least one test" my question relates to the term verge; is that term used as Webster intended which means by Q1 of 2012 (very soon) or it that term under Bret's definition which could be a year plus. For example I thought we were on the verge of having a shareholder meeting; and having financial data - I should have considered the "Bret factor" in my time line. BTW - I hope I am wrong regarding management; time always tells as does the share price.
NNLX is clearly the worse of the two dogs! NNVC's management team are medical professionals; they have Dr. everywhere while NNLX has Barnhizers everywhere. NNVC is not a family run business; its got a better chance. Actually if you look at the NNLX company profile here in Investor Hub they mention ZERO information regarding management. Its all about the product (and its a great product) and given the fact that nothing is mentioned abouts the management team tells you this dog isn't going hunting anytime soon. I get the feeling NNLX is being run like a science fair project!
Hey! everyone spells better than me. Between my crapy spelling/writing and eye sight its amazing I can be understood (at times)!
The saga continues! I thought we were just kidding around about the SH dates! Feb. of 2012 wasn't even on my radar! Hey is that Valentine's Day? If Bret can't excute a shareholder meeting - how in the hell is he going to deal with the FDA process having no clinical expreince.
yep some people will have the gall to ask for finanical statements and try to understand silly things like the number of issued shares going up. Why can't they just trust in Bret?
Hey AKAPAK - I know you are familar with the "Bupp factor"; it looks to me we are having a "Bret factor" forming and folks are not interested in waiting 12 years to get this company moving. Your thoughts are welcome on Bupp vs. Bret.
Its funny how the speculation has the spin of no one in there right mind would sell; thus its tax return payments, margin calls, financial issues. How about the fact that very little finanical data from mamagement. I have not been impressed with management on communication to shareholders (outside of family and friends)and overall progress of the company.
My Charles Schwab has my remaining EESO shares listed under the ticker symbol 1852795 - which means non-sellable security. I will call them to get an update.
No big deal - only that biotech tech companies are all about science, precision, etc. So after XOMA gets kicked in the teeth regarding its phase III trials - a sqwishy headline about a "buy" recommendation, even through you are just a shareholder, does not reflect well on the company nor does it do any favors to the share price.
Its a "Buy If" rating not a "Buy" rating. For example "buy if" it goes down to $1.00.