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.
You can't transfer shares between different funds, those are different parties, institutionally, not the different pockets in the same entity. They enter stocks and shares by a market purchase, to have a very clean transaction. So that would not be what happened here.
He already owns them. So it's definitely not "more" dilution. The shares he is declaring were previously issued, whether via the offering or on the open market, it's not relevant to any more dilution. We already know the outstanding and issued share count.
I don't have the link, but practitioners post on the UK governmental site on DCVaxL, but that's just not what they do.
They're not focused on investors and investments. This is a ridiculous point. If it killed someone, yes, you can bet people might post that they had a bad experience. But otherwise, people are too busy enjoying what time they have left than to worry about your short position to help you.
You have no idea "what the FDA is saying."
There is no explanation from them at this time. What we do know is they were allowed to continue treating the patients. They also could have applied to end the halt, but chose not to do so for purposes of the delay. The proof is in the new trials proceeding here and in Germany, not at the instance of the company, but at the instance of highly respected anti-cancer institutions in both countries, including the NIH as sponsor here in the USA.
You're simply repeating common assumptions about skepticism for any Phase III trial, that anyone would repeat without any information.
I am talking about both previous trials, and what the doctors who are behind the trials are saying is apparent. I have no anecdotal evidence. I don't know anyone in the trial.
The contradictions...
So you are saying that patients from the Phase 1 or early trials, who were still living long after they should have died, and who did videos and PR's, don't count now? Hmm... That's convenient.
As if a few years ago, or even 1o years ago (unlikely) - was a bad thing...
That's a major development and alone should help NWBO's share price.
Drive the price down, making it impossible to capitalize or forcing worse and worse capitalization problems such that a company is either forced to sell, or goes bankrupt trying to bring a promising product to market. They know it's expensive and the weak link is capitalization. They know that's where they can smash, and smash and smash, until they can grab it by any means necessary. It's a jungle.
They use the same techniques we see in elections, viral fake news, fear, truth mixed with false assumptions and outrageous conclusions to drive capital away from these companies. It's a very clear tactic. Most probably don't even know why they are doing it in the big picture, just that when they join in, it's easy money for vandals. Some get notoriety... I think we know one of those.
Are you kidding!? There are numerous PR's and videos from UCLA as well as the company, showing various patients who have gone on to live well and long, after receiving DCVax. This has not been a secret. You just have to open your eyes and look for them. People have posted those items for years.
Yep, and it's why the shorts desperately want to take our shares away, somehow, for cheap. These are organized whale hunting expeditions.... wolf packs.
That may have been the case while they were still contemplating doing the rest of the expanded trial. Ultimately, the PR'd though, that they were ending the trial, and were not going to do those additional patients. Remember, they've been under a halt, in terms of taking any new patients for quite some time now. But they confirmed they had enough patients to finalize the trial, and taking more now would delay the finalization of the trial for too long of a time.
Thanks Kabunushi. Nice getting to know you too on the board!
Thank you. Was just typing in response to our fellow poster and coming up with the hypothetical. I realized I had not said that it was a hypothetical clearly, but it was too late to edit. I'm glad too. :) Gotta get this DCVax and similar treatments that will be potent weapons against cancer, into the available category for patients though. The reality is, it can happen to anyone.
That's exactly why these hostile forces attack companies like this one. If they can create so many problems, they can't finance, or create an impression that they've failed, when they haven't, retail and institutional investors just might buy the fake news, and they can steal the company from the loyal longs paying attention. It seems to be a common, regular story.
Thank you Flipper44, Senti, Learningcurve2020 & Savage39 and anyone else I may have missed. This is my last post for the evening. :) Much appreciated and I'm glad, at least for now, that I'm healthy.
Thanks for the thorough answer Flipper. I tend to concur with your view. Alternative interpretations are certainly possible ala Senti and other thoughtful commentators, respectfully. But I tend to think these trials may ultimately show that there was statistical success in regards to the primary endpoints, ultimately.
I can't answer for Flipper, and I'm sure that will be a better answer, but, IMHO, I do think these two trials suggest (given who the investigators are, the combination, and the targets) that neither FUTILITY or SAFETY were likely the issues. And we already knew that they were allowed to continue treating patients in the Phase III trial, so that also seemed clear from those facts as well. But, if there were any doubt before that someone could concoct, I think the strong suggestion from these further disclosures is that futility and safety are not the critical, high-level concerns that some shorts would have us believe.
Obviously, we don't know absolutely, until we know the reasons. But I think the indicia are fairly strong, if indirect, and reassuring.
Just want to clarify, I don't have a terminal diagnosis in real life. This was just a hypothetical taking Pyrrh's hypothetical and trying to turn it on its head by taking the role of a patient in his hypothetical situation. Just wanted to be clear about that... I wanted to change it when I saw it, but it's too late.
Hmmm... I wonder what the regulators, investigators, sponsors and relevant companies could have in mind? Surely they don't intend to waste everyone's time, lives and treasure...?
Yeah, I'm sorry. I have a terminal diagnosis, and I'm still alive long after I'm supposed to be dead, and I don't care what someone on a bulletin board says about failed trial... that's not my experience. Your entire notion of a "failed trial" doesn't come from the FDA or NWBO, it comes from bulletin boards and columnists like AF. It's not real. It's fantasy.
And if it did fail for me... I'm dead already. Sorry, I just don't think your point makes much sense, in the real world. In a fantasy world, sure, I can imagine it.
Flipper, just curious: Did you discuss that this is a trial sponsored by UCLA and the NIH, not NWBO? An investigator sponsored trial, it seems. That's the only item that is surprising to me given your theory.
It connotes to me stronger evidence of efficacy, actually. Otherwise why would the investigators sponsor a "failed" trial...? And of course, it aligns with the German trial as well, which is also an investigator sponsored trial.
It shows very strong institutional backing also. I can't imagine that the FDA would look at that and reject this treatment, as it suggests very strong backing from major institutions... and it is coming effectively AFTER the Phase III, though results have not yet been unblended and tabulated.
You combine that with Arm 1 and Arm 2 in the new trial (Arm I being only DCVax), and it's very compelling to me.
The only problem with your theory... these people don't have time to drop out and go somewhere else instead of hanging out with the DCVax crowd. The premise is based upon people who have all the time in the world, and that just ain't so.
Could very well be. :) Let's hope.
Well, if it's not a confirmatory trial, which I think it very likely could be, then I just don't see how the FDA approves the ARM 1 of this trial, if you've got the efficacy of grapefruit juice, or if the Phase III failed on its primary measures.
Something would be grossly wrong in that world. Same goes for the colon cancer trial in Germany. You start adding things together and it's hard for me to see how much of anything that the short people say.... cause
Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason
To short . . .
They got little hands
And little eyes
And they walk around
Tellin' great big lies
They got little noses
And tiny little teeth
They wear platform shoes
On their nasty little feet
I'll skip the chorus, though it's just in fun...
They got little baby legs
That stand so low
You got to pick 'em up
Just to say hello
They got little cars
That go beep, beep, beep
They got little voices
Goin' peep, peep, peep
They got grubby little fingers
And dirty little minds
They're gonna get you every time
....
Skipping chorus...
Well said, and I do not doubt your theory. Usually it's an effort to take these companies over on the cheap that leads to these long, intense short attack's involving, almost always, the same players...
That's why now people WATCH for them...cause they know.
The pack doesn't know the end game, only that it's easy money.
Thanks! :)
It's understandable that shorts would be bitter. To place so much hope on failure... and then to see hope and facts begin to turn the ship around before they had closed out their positions and start to steal those positions away, with potentially no way to cheaply recreate that short position. It must be very sad...
Yes, after the circumstances are announced. Nothing has been announced here. Doesn't mean it's not. Clearly they seem to be preparing for that circumstance with this trial. I would bet that they are waiting upon final approval.
It's all certainly speculation, but solid speculation. I bought at .35, a nice little chunk to average down. I was planning to buy today anyway, anticipating news soon, and wanting to average down no matter what, but that was nice to see certainly.
I tend to think, having done my own research, that Flipper has a pretty solid scenario laid out. Again, we can't know until it all gets approved and announced, but it seems like a good strategy to see it all through.
I agree. Saw that right away. Seems to suggest that the FDA is willing to be quite flexible. If some are correct, and the parameters were also re-adjusted on the Phase III, it's a very good sign. This, honestly, suggests that to me. Again, NOT an expert here.
After reading your post here, I'm going to have to call my doctor and beg for a prescription of anti-depressants... OMG. Life is dark!
JUNO was 5 to 6 billion in valuation, and so were the other immune cancer plays in the Car T category, without approval.
So, $5 is reasonably good for an initial pop range, but it should drift much higher ultimately. Basically you're giving it a top initial value of $772 million. That's very conservative, but reasonable.
I like benchmark measures as a general measure of fairness, particularly if they start to see other events, like jockeying for buyouts, etc.
Those treatments Car T treatments, right now are only for Leukemia, blood cancers and similar categories, though they do hope to get some results for solid cancers. It's only part of the immune system they are activating. Certainly, there are lots of potential competitors in the Car T pipeline of companies for the Car T space, but as we know from deaths so far, and other factors, the market is not as hot as it was for them, but they are still fairly robustly valued versus each other. Juno, right now, is still in the $2.14B range for market cap, as of Friday.
If NWBO were valued at 2.14B, with current shares outstanding, that would be a $13.85. Again, that's JUNO now, without an approved product, but with lots of cash and relationships. This is not to say it will hit that, just to give a benchmark. I think that's a value for a company without an approved product however, that has lots of interest from the market. At 5B, you're in the $32.85 range, with current shares outstanding. $6B is $38.83, and $10B is around $64.72 with current shares outstanding. All of this includes the most recent offering of shares. These are not predictions, just numbers to give people ranges for valuation levels based upon market cap. $1B is around $6.47 per share with current shares outstanding.
I value my stock potential by market cap, because that excludes dilution as a factor on the stock price, and is more of a total value if you were to sell the company. "Share price" is a crude method to value a company, and isn't actually that meaningful given other factors.
We'll see, but upon great results, $5 is a reasonably conservative level, and of course it depends on the results and how they are evaluated, generally, by the market. But this vaccine has broad application, everyone expects, ultimately. The market may continue to evaluate the company conservatively, particularly with the noise of shorts, but ultimately, that price is unsustainably low I believe, though it depends on the signs of efficacy and the expectations that come from it upon the demonstration of their results. If it's questionably effective, then it's harder to evaluate and one would have to consider it at that time. Honestly, I hope and expect that the results will be fairly stellar and very encouraging, and establish this as a baseline of the standard of care, going forward in GBM, and with direct, perhaps many cancers. That's going to lead to a pretty crazy sized opportunity, in my view.
Of course, this is all my opinion, and everyone else should rely upon their own due diligence. I don't claim to be an expert in anything.
I doubt this is what has occurred, but I also doubt, with firm confidence, that the FDA would allow such a distortion to persist. So I think it's immaterial at this stage.
Additionally, it's speculative, because no one actually knows the full story, behind the scenes. I find it implausible. But if one is going to allege "illegality", one should sue.
I doubt you would be successful at proving his point in a court. Bulletin boards... anything is possible.
Actually, I don't "blame it all on shorts" at all. I told you, the pricing currently was negotiated in the offering and I told you that was completely reasonable and expected by me, of such financiers.
I told you also, it's often how people "ENTER" a stock, that drives their sentiment... and why. I did find your comment about someone here knowing the markets better than the entire bulletin board as curious, so I did discuss that comment, and my view about people who think that way, and post on bulletin boards... maybe you didn't like that point?
Once again, you have taken someone's statements out of context, to make a point that is incorrect.
I understand why people do that... but it's not a great thing to do if you want to win your point.
I agree. Otherwise, there's no real purpose for them being involved or lending their names. Scientists don't lend their names, at that level, to an SAB, for no reason, IMHO. It would be ludicrous.
I disagree with your version of what is going on, but not with all of your points.
1. As I've said repeatedly, they set the price at .35, and haircuts, even on validated but not yet approved stocks is common. CPXX, after it announced its results, is one example. Ultimately, they were bought for $30, a few weeks later. But they were up to 18, back down to 8, and below and all over the place, and yes, they did a discounted offering, because they needed cash and were so volatile, and those who were going to finance them, didn't want to take any risk. Period. They are financiers, not speculators. The stock's market cap started, before the good news came out, not far from NWBO's in the 50-60 million dollar range. Many big investors often stop buying before the binary events, to avoid the downside risk. I note, NWBO has recently had some substantial buys, which is encouraging, on this note.
2. Yes, there are many who get out of these stocks because they are not bank CD's and they have no idea. They get discouraged and sell. Biotech stocks go up and down, with incredible volatility that I think often surprises even seasoned blue chip and index fund investors. Many just can't take it. But then there are others, for whom these are their first investments. They often freak out completely. Short's love to stir these people up.
3. Yes, there are many traders who follow the hot money, and this is not momentarily, where hot money is looking to go. Delays in results, make that harder. That money comes, when there is news, nevertheless. No matter what.
4. None of this has anything to do with the ultimate value, if the technology is validated. This is where the shorts love to post nonsense to discourage the longs. It's just noise. And of course, some of the shorts are, in fact, just money managers with their money tied up elsewhere. They are pushing the price lower, with negative posts, hoping to sweeten this opportunity, while they ride some other temporary bus up a small percentage or avoid any capital declines. The farther down it is, the less risk for them to get in later, and the lower it is when news comes out, the more appreciation will be possible when they eventually get in.
I don't worry about the various blue meanies who are intentionally posting nonsense, though I certainly evaluate all posters, their capacity for summarizing and understanding what is going on, and what I measure as their sincerity. A good number try to fake sincerity... disappointed longs, but now they know... etc.
The most important thing for me, when I read posts on boards, is to find the most credible, believable, logical and authentic posters, and evaluate their posts, if I think they have insights. There are many great posters around, who are personally invested, and are doing the same. The hive mind amongst these posters, is a valuable resource. But again, ultimately, one has to make up one's own mind. All investments are a personal decision, and one should not blame others. The markets are what they are, and there is certainly shorting. I have come to take that as a given, and I try to ride the opposite waves of the shorts, knowing they are there, but being philosophically opposed to those who behave badly and try to move stocks with false information and insincere, constantly negative posts that attack companies, many of them, on basically the same fundamental points, just to manipulate other investors and manipulate the price. People who need to make their daily bread that way, are a disappointment.
Thank you for your excellent posts and input and best wishes to you also Sentiment!
Validation comes when the results are received. They are blind now. And you know that is the truth.
The company can talk to bloggers and media and shareholders, as appropriate. There is nothing really new in any of it. It's just primarily reassurance that yes, what they have been saying, continues to be true, often in previous press releases or presentations or Q&A at events.
And they can express their opinions, with the understanding, I think we all have, that such conversations are always driven by the opinions of the parties in that conversation. Of course an executive is going to be positive about their efforts. If he was in a negative state of mind, he'd be out looking for a new job.
He's not a "stock promoter". He represents his company well and speaks well to the technology and opportunity. You choose to see it as "promotion" because you interpret it in the context of your views on investing. It is what it is... he's not telling you to buy this stock, he's advocating competently for the effort to get DCVax approved and keep the company that is doing that, moving forward.
Again, given your views, not sure why you haven't moved on. I see tiny companies I'm interested in, all the time, and I follow them until I decide they are worth more or less time. Some I may even initially dabble in, and determine they are just not for me, and take my funds out, sometimes at a small gain, sometimes at a small loss And sometimes, with multiple accounts, both a gain and a loss that effectively make it a wash. I don't lose a lot because I'm very careful. My "losses" are usually to eliminate gains for tax purposes and I usually am back into the companies I ultimately commit to, from careful analysis of the risk/reward ratio and my estimation of the size of the opportunity, potential level a company is grossly undervalued and its potential for technological success and survival to that point.
But when I don't like a company, I'm not hanging out discussing it. Even amongst the companies in which I invest, there are very few that I take the time to do much chatter at all. This is one of those companies.
But if I thought they were crooks or it was a lost cause, or hardly had a chance of success, you bet I'd be gone. Why waste my time chasing mirages when there are opportunities one can believe in, around most corners?
I'm hopeful as well. Wishing us all the best, and that your January options make you rich!
Sorry, by why should anyone "try" to make you a believer. If you believe what you wrote, why not be done with it and move on?
It happens all the time, even sometimes with companies that already have announced great results, e.g. CPXX. Their last offering, before they were bought, came at a substantial discount to the price at which the shares were actually trading. It's the cost of raising funds, and it happens. The key is to avoid bankruptcy, and there is still a lot of appreciation that is available based upon market cap, even with more dilution, that will generate substantial returns for reasonable shareholders, if a company like this is successful.
Dilution is a fact for every entrepreneur who starts a company. You can't typically grow such companies unless you are willing to be diluted down in your interest, or you have unlimited funds to keep maintaining your stake.
Granted, we're investors, but we're investors in an early stage, small cap. Dilution is a part of life, and it's far better, at a stage like this company is at, than waiting to default and be forced into liquidation. No one in their right mind would expect that outcome, and it rarely has to happen except when small shareholders get obsessed with dilution. Then, in some biotech cases, the shareholders actually cut off their noses to spite themselves, without a full comprehension of the causes. The best example of that was Cellular Dynamics. I was not invested there, but in a similar company, at that time, and I recall watching from afar with gratitude that the shareholders in the company I was invested in were wise enough to see that and avoid the same outcome. Cellular Dynamic's shareholders refused to approve an increase in shares, and potential ultimate massive dilution, for a fund raise, and forced the company to go initially file for bankruptcy and then to sell for extra extra cheap to a Japanese company. They could have voted for the increase, the company would have raised, and they could have sold, at a reasonable price before the bankruptcy. Many voted against and HELD. Yikes. I believe often these kinds of circumstances are actually driven by financial players involved with the buyout, who want a really, really cheap price and who know shareholders buttons can be pushed on these issues. It's very easy to manipulate people online, with these kinds of matters, into acting against their self-interest. It's apparently one of the easiest things in the world to do.