Yep.

I once had a football coach tell me if you don't have grass stains on your back side, you are not trying hard enough.

So, Nanovirides got some grass stains on their back side on the Ebola effort. It is a very complicated virus. At least they tried.

Negative.

The proper measurement equipment, additional expert staffing and facilities at the new cGMP plant have overcome those road blocks already.

The company has chosen to pursue both Flucide and Herpescide in parallel.

Just a propagation of errors based on negative speculation.

I had a professor give me 70% credit on a physics test problem because I made a mistake at the very beginning of my answer that propagated all the way through my work.

You get a "C" for trying.

Part 1 and 2 are false so all subsequent parts are too.

Much more plausible is the capability that the expertly equipped and staff cGMP facility. They now have a much more efficient process to model virus binding points, synthesize cides to match those binding points, characterize production at various stages, pre-test viruses cultures and sort out the most effective cides.

This is a new capability that allows them to take their cides to an even more effective level.

Because they can do this so much more efficiently, they have chosen to use that process on all their cides.

Nothing wrong with that.

Of course, that is not what I am saying.

The statement speaks for itself.

KMJBJN, I like your football analogy.

The NNVC management decisions get criticized for being too optimistic and now for being too forth coming.

You are correct, the expertly staffed cGMP facility has allowed the company to retool, recompute, with greater speed and effectivity than every before. Why not make use of this incredible asset of the cGMP facility? The inhouse ability to empirically sort the library of cides against live viruses is huge in my book. The fact that the company can synthesize several cides, quickly and test them quickly, sets the company apart from any other entity on the planet. Given the long lead time getting a FDA approval, it is prudent to make sure you have the best candidate. The schedule hit for finding the best candidate is far less than the ultimate FDA approval process lead time. Maturing the synthesis, pre-testing, production processes in parallel is a net schedule saver over all.

The company has never been in a better place to succeed.

Look, Seymour is a good salesman, I will agree. That is one of the hats a good CEO has to wear. He did what he had to do for the company to raise money and be in the position they are in now. Many biotech's would be in way over their heads in debt, and be out of business by now by following a standard borrowing approach to funding the technology development.

It is a small company, and they are a little bit over their heads in the public stock market arena. They have made a few minor mistakes that a big company would not. However, it is not a matter of integrity, or fraud. From a technical standpoint, the progress they have made in developing a brand new technology drug platform, with empirical evidence of effectively killing viruses in the host, with no evidence of toxicity, is their greatest virtue or value.

It has been my experience from managing state of the art, difficult technical developments, is if you have to put the technical efforts at the highest priority, everything else will work out when the technology succeeds. It can be hard to watch from a schedule and budget standpoint until success is achieved.

I know its hard to hold both of these truths in you head at the same time but, it is the case. I guess that's why I like the company. I do invest in it when buying opportunities present themselves. I don't see this company going down. They have never been in a better position to succeed.

No doubt it is a volatile stock and not for the faint of heart. The fact that the company has no revenues makes all the fundamentals, in a classical sense, look awful.

However, if you understand what they are doing in terms of developing a completely new technology to stop viruses in the body, in their tracks, and you are honest about where they are in that development cycle, you will understand that the company is a true disruptor.

The company has never been in a better position to succeed.

Risk reward baby.

$2.4 M shares short as of last public report. No they have not covered yet, but have added to their position, which is reflected in the price action of the stock price lately.

http://shortsqueeze.com/shortinterest/stock/NNVC.htm

They are not in complete control, but they do dominate the price action during low volume stretches.

I agree, the company has given them the opportunity to play with all the delays, but that will end soon.

The company has never been in a better position to succeed.

Nope.

I believe the so called Short Cabal is both short and long this stock. They are playing with house money at this point. My read from following the action of this stock for more about 10 years, especially the last 3, is that there has been a concerted effort to wring out the weak hands, buy up the stock at lower prices by the so called Short Cabal. They can afford to hold their short position and if the stock explodes, then they will cover their shorts and drive it up even higher, then they might short it again depending on the circumstances. It is all a matter of when this will happen but it will happen.

Until the shorts spontaneously cover which can happen when you least expect it. There has been a sizable short interest (2M+ shares) for a long time. As long as interest rates are basically zero, that can go on for a while. But if the stock never goes lower, what's the point of staying short?

Go with that.

We'll see.

There is such a thing called a hot-hand-fallacy. Past success does not necessarily correlate to future success.

I also believe the ultimate goal of the Short Cabal is to pick up as many shares of NNVC as possible at a lower price. Even they think the price will go up big.

That's your opinion. It's possible, but I don't see it going that way.

The share price may never get to $1.5 per share or bounce off of it.

I believe the market has priced in all the factors I listed and the ones you mentioned to at least a 50% premium from the position they were in last year, which was pretty bleak.

Risk reward baby...

He is right if there is never any material news.

But we all know that will not be the case this time.

The company has no choice but to go for material success or failure.

I agree, the company has exhausted the market's patience for materially relevant news.

The company has cautiously positioned themselves for that success with the expertly staffed, operational cGMP, batch scaling and process control implementation, and collaborative agreements with Universities for Herpescide testing and St Jude for Flucide testing.

The company has never been in a better position to succeed. I think the market thinks that too.

So, I don't see the share price going much below $1.5 per share. Of course the short cabal can do temporary damage while we wait on the news, but it will spring back.

And it does not change the fact that I will be adding much more NNVC shares going forward. Its a great company with a revolutionary solution to viruses.

BS

No one can predict the future of stock prices with certainty up or down.

Actually, the shares are on the public domain now. So any stealing is happening in the open market. This is standard stuff. Strong hands wringing out weak hands. Just look at the time and energy to denigrate the company but someone always buys the stock when people sell.

Wrong again

Its clear that Trade Secrets are out of your area of expertise.

Trade Secrets are not required to be documented publicly, that would be counter productive to give the secrets away. It is clear that both Thercour and NNVC have added them to their IP.

I also agree with KMBJN, that it matters more that NNVC generates revenues from their development efforts and not who owns the IP at this point. Based on the solid relationship between NNVC and Theracour, stock holders of NNVC will benefit from both company's success.

Sorry for the run-on sentence.

Who cares.

I'm not basing my investment on the Trade Secrets paid for by NNVC. I was making a counter point as to why NNVC would pay a 30% market up to Theracour and that NNVC is not Diwan's personal money machine.

NNVC does have employees. The work may be segregated in the cGMP facility and there may be a joint agreement for Trade Secret ownership between Theracour and NNVC, but the Trade Secrets for developing, the verification/validation (call it QC for quality control) processes for drug production scale up do exist, by virtue of the fact that the QC process for 200g production is locked down, while the QC process for 500g and larger batch sizes are in development and are of significant, proprietary value to both companies. Certainly the Trade Secrets that have been developed at the cGMP, strengthens the licensing agreements and does not circumvent those agreements. But if the company were ever to sell out to a big pharma for larger scale production, the QC Trade Secrets are the key, since they are the only proven methods to scaling up production beyond Diwan's numerous patents.

I have direct experience with Trade Secrets and I have patents myself as an employee (System Engineer) for a large company. I have gone through much training on the subjects and am versed in the laws protecting such IP. My argument is valid whether you acknowledge it or not. Some simple research on Trade Secrets makes my point:

Who Owns a Trade Secret?
A trade secret is a type of of intellectual property, and it comes in many different forms. There are no actual laws governing trade secret ownership, but trade secrets generally pertain to information held by a company rather than by an individual. So typically employers or hiring parties own trade secret information even if it is generated by an employee.

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/ownership-of-a-trade-secret.html

You failed to mention that I said who pays for it. The Trade Secret that is. The fact that it was developed at the cGMP facility, which is owned by NNVC, for the purpose of pilot production development, is a big factor. Possession is 9 tenths of the law.

Not for the drug production verification/validation process at the cGMP facility. The process development was paid for by NNVC and is a Trade Secret owned by NNVC. Since Diwan is an owner of NNVC, he has a large stake in the ownership, but the Trade Secrets, not the patents are owned by the company, Nanoviricides Inc.

It is determined by who pays for it. Typically, developing the IP at the companies facility keeps it there and solidifies ownership.

Given that NNVC has a new, never seen before, revolutionary drug in development, by definition, no one else has the expertise to help them develop it. It also protects NNVC's IP. Keep in mind that NNVC owns the IP developed and paid for in their cGMP facility.

It's the best allocation of capital to achieve success.

Call it what you will, G&A, mark up, overhead, etc., its just a markup to direct costs.

It is worth every penny to have the best in the business providing their expertise. No one else has that expertise. It is below comparable costs of universities etc. It is actually below what the market would bare. Going anywhere else would cost more and would be less productive.

Just semantics. It is equivalent to an overhead in that it is a mark up to direct costs to NNVC. It's worth every penny.

It's also why Nanoviricides Inc purchased and owns the cGMP building. It reduces their overhead costs among all the other good things it brings.

30% Overhead is actually quite low compared to government contracts with the private sector businesses. I have seen contracts with private sector businesses with 200% overhead mark up on labor salaries routinely let.

It would not shock me attaching the ligand to the micelles is not the hard part. They don't need to spend their energy on that. Likely getting the batch to batch consistency was the harder task to solve. The micelles approach is also what seperates their technology from other techniques that are discovering the binding techniques to viruses. Finding the virus binding point and the correct ligand is only half the problem.

Loanranger, very good accounting of the statements made regarding scale up.

I have commented on this already. I concluded that the statements are not inconsistent. I wish it were spelled out more concretely, and the 10Q appears to be a compilation of internal memo's that were generated at meetings over the quarter.

What was said about 500g scale up in December 2015 and January 2016 are true. The company had not been able to make consistent batches of more than 200g's up to that point. The break through to making 500g batches with the proper consistency they were looking for, was achieved and verified, but probably in a manual fashion.

It comes down to the definition of scale up. The method to achieve consistent 500g batches was identified. Now they are working on refining the less manually intensive process, with process controls and and associated characterization products and procedures to make it more of a automatic, turn the crank process.

This is a very good indication of progress and intent to manufacture their cides in a efficient, repeatable fashion. It takes much of the batch to batch reliability risk out, and the process can be used over and over again for each side, for Tox studies, clinical trials and initial market entry. These more automated process can also be considered IP that has significant value in a potential Big Pharma deal. It also is a path finder for larger batches of 1kg or more. This is the scope of the scale up process. They are stepping up to the full scope of commercializing their product, starting with Herpescide.

And deservedly so

Total BS