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 have also had a small cap "sure thing" big winner that was sold to one of the big boys. Its not a good feeling and if I thought that would happen with NNVC, I would not have the position that I have.
Assuming that Flucide is successfully brought to market as the first drug in a series of drugs, I think that NNVC can be a $50 to a $100 billion company within 10 years or so. But if the company is sold early, I guess that as long as the sale price reflects at least a $10 billion market cap, I can probably live with it...
Apparently what was said at the conference in Europe did not amount to much...
I'm glad to see that someone responded. However, I don't think he is correct about the "2 mg per pill". The bottles I have say that they have "2 mg per dose" and a dose is 2 pills. That means there is 1 mg of anatabine per pill.
He should call the customer service line and speak to a doctor. I have found CS to be very responsive. I would be surprised if they did not send him some unflavored to try. Could someone with access to that website suggest that to him?
Good news! I just found out that I have THREE more shares! The fractional shares have finally been distributed...
Actually 5 times the 10 day average according to Scottrade...
@Leifsmith
Please email me at gt59@intrstar.net .
Scottrade has NNVC as a marginable stock. However as of this morning, it is on the list of "Stocks Subject to a Higher Maintenance Requirement".
Since the SP is over $5, you would normally be able to leverage it at 70%. But Scottrade is applying a 20% "penalty" which means that you can only leverage 50%.
Questions for the board:
1) Are other brokerages also applying this "penalty"?
2) What is the reason for this?
3) Is it because NNVC has been newly uplisted?
4) Is it because of the recent reverse split?
I have another stock that has that same "penalty" - GALT. I tried to get Scottrade to tell me why and they would not. Now I have the same issue with NNVC... There is probably a good reason for it. But I think somebody at Scottrade should be able (and willing) to tell me exactly what that reason is.
Shorts re-asserted themselves ahead of the conference in Europe next week...
I think you mean BTX(Bio Time).
So your short position is still underwater... Well keep trying and maybe you'll get some suckers to sell their shares. I know I'd like to buy some more at $3.50 so you keep at it.
I agree. Scottrade never did show the news that up listing would happen today. I assume that it had something to do with the added "D" on the symbol. Now that the "D" is gone, maybe things will get back to normal. So bring on those PRs!
Echo20 said...
A good PR BEFORE OPENING would be nice.
Thanks for the response!
I have three accounts so that's three cups of that expensive Starbucks coffee now - or $210 dollars toward a trip to Hawaii later...
ZincFinger said...
(it's less than the price of a cup of coffee at Starbucks anyway.)
@ DaysOnTheBeach
Is your Scottrade account showing that your NNVC shares are marginable? Mine does not. I have been expecting them to become marginable, but that is not reflected in my account this morning.
Also, I still do not have that "fractional" share showing up in my Scottrade or TDAMERITRADE accounts.
Short Interest as of September 13... Decreased only 131 thousand shares to 29.1 million shares. But the days to cover ballooned from 37 to 54.
HI Lief,
I am not intending to be antagonistic. I appreciate your efforts both here and on the Star board.
But my whole point is that we do not really know what the MMs are doing so we cannot bet with them or against them. We can only surmise what we think they were doing after the fact. What we do know is that they have some kind of a financial interest and apparently also have the ability to manipulate the market to some degree.
I have to believe that if their efforts to input "liquidity" cause them to "get behind"; then they will make an effort to recoup that loss. When that happens, who gets the short end? Will it be the MMs, the big boys, or us small fry? I just don't see that system operating in our favor over the long term. But then that's JMHO...
Lief said...
If you know what the MMs are doing and don't like it, then bet against them.
Your post supports the contention that the whole MM program is just another way for the "bureaucracy" to reward its friends. We don't really "need" them. We just give them special access so they can make money off of us.
Cabel said...
Up here in Canada we don't have MM's and it works fine,... all electronic as well
Unfortunately, when your MM "does not like to lose money", he becomes just another "trader" (with the significant exception that he has the power to manipulate the market.) When the market is being manipulated somebody else is going to lose. That loser will most likely be average investors like you and I. The "liquidity" MMs provide is always going to be at someone's expense. I don't think it's worth it.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think so. Its basic economic theory. And what "I Need Help" describes, appears to impact both the supply curve and the demand curve.
The "market" does not have a financial interest, therefore I trust the "market" to be an honest broker. The MM does have a financial interest, therefore I do not trust the MM to be an honest broker. In the final analysis, I believe their primary motivation will be their own financial interest. It is unlikely that their primary motivation will be to provide "liquidity".
But then maybe my experiences as a long time investor in Star Scientific has made me a bit jaded...
That sounds so... anti-free market.
I Need Help said...
When one considers the big picture, it becomes clearer that lots of shorting is done to keep the market liquid when MM's are short on shares. Lots of MM activity just keeps the market from overheating, keeps the market liquid, and keeps the MM's in the black. Just liken you and I, MM's don't like to lose money. Can't fault them for that, as long as they don't get greedy.
@seek the light
Thank you. That report was very interesting...
So I take it you shorted at $5...
Not just lower "quality" standards. Basically all you have to do is prove efficacy and that you are not poisoning the meat. No FDA approval required. This could be an excellent shortcut to quickly access a revenue stream...
I have to believe that most reputable journals value being known as a "reputable" journal. That being the case, I would expect that the ability of such outside influences to overrule the science would be minimal. However, it would be extremely naive to assume that it does not occur. And I would expect the probability (however small) of such an occurrence to increase as the amount of money to be lost (or gained) increases.
It is more likely that big pharma or some other financial interest, would try to get their friends in the scientific community to find something wrong with the study or its conclusions during the peer review process. And this may be one reason why the peer review process appears to be taking so long. It is also why it is so important to have someone like Dr. Ladenson involved. He is one of the big names in endocrinology. Overcoming his gravitas with spurious or specious arguments will be difficult to do, but could delay the process.
Because the medical community will not accept the results as factual until they have been vetted through the peer review process and accepted for publication in a reputable journal. It could be a major problem if the company were to "publish" something that was not accepted verbatim upon going through the peer review process. Most initial write ups that are submitted do not survive the peer review process in their original form.
Sometimes the reviewers discover major flaws in the design of the study that negates the supposed results entirely. (But with someone of Dr. Ladenson's stature involved, it is very unlikely that there would have been flaws in the design of the study.) With well designed studies, most times the changes are minor revisions to the verbiage. The goal is to insure that any lessons learned are properly and exactly characterized. These are reasons why a company will usually put out a brief overview in a press release and then wait for the peer review process to be completed.
IDCC asked...
Why must we wait for a journal to publish the clinical trials ?
THAT is a GOOD commercial!
All my NNVC shares are now consolidated under NNVCD. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the fractional shares were to be "rounded up". That did not happen with my Scottrade or TDAmeritrade accounts. In fact, two of my accounts had over a half share that disappeared. Between my three accounts I lost 1.571 shares.
Before I start an argument with my brokers, does anyone know where the "rounded-up" report came from?
Google search Agora and SEC. There were at least two instances - one where Agora sued the SEC and one where they apparently lost a case in which the SEC had charged Agora or some of their associates with some misdeed.
I am not saying the SEC was right or that Agora is "bad". But Addison mentioned that their policy was a way of staying out of trouble with the SEC. I don't like that policy and feel that they are devaluing my investment in the Agora Financial Reserve by keeping it in place. In other words, I feel that my investment in the Reserve is not worth as much since they lost Patrick Cox.
I must disagree. There are other ways to deal with such problems. For instance, some companies do not allow their employees to trade in a stock until three days after the recommendation is made. I actually think Agora's overcautious position has more to do with some problem that Agora had with the SEC years ago.
Tmf1955 - "Agora's position on writers, researchers investing in the stocks they recommend, is actually a good one. Prevents manipulation of the share price to the writers advantage."
Patrick did express regret that he could not invest in the stocks he recommends. I had somehow missed (or forgot) that Agora's writers could not invest in their picks. I made it a point the next day to corner Addison Wiggins and express my displeasure about that limitation. I actually do prefer that the people who's recommendations I follow, have some skin in the game. It was obvious that Agora was not going to change their policy. Even though Patrick had not said anything about leaving, I wondered then how much longer he would be there.
I also began questioning the wisdom of my Agora Financial Reserve investment. It was not cheap. And face it, if an investment writer is doing a really good job but cannot invest in his picks, how long will he stay associated with Agora? If it was me, I'd leave too. That means that every time Agora hires a winner, it is going to be a temporary situation. I did make this specific point with Addison.
And in response to your question about what I think? My portfolio reflects that fact that I think there's a good chance that Patrick is right about that $300...
Also, I think you mean "peer review".
I went to an Agora event a couple of years ago and ended up spending a couple of hours in one on one conversation with Patrick Cox one night after dinner in the restaurant. I enjoyed that conversation. He is a very interesting individual.
His comment that night was that he expected Star to be a $300 stock within 5 years. His actual quote was a very colorful exclamatory declaration that I will not post on a message board. However, he was emphatic on that point. He also shared his private supply of Anatabloc. It was in one of the little dispensers but he said they were a stronger version. They were the same size and tasted the same as the normal lozenges.
Life Extension Foundation is doing an Alzheimer's study involving a "nutritional supplement" to suppress inflammation. Very interesting, but for some reason I doubt that it's anatabine... At this point, I don't have much respect left for the "good people" at LEF who continue to ignore something that has made a big difference in my life. I'm glad I didn't have wait on them to get their heads out of their ***** to tell me about Anatabloc.
Twenty million Americans alive today are destined to contract Alzheimer's disease, an afflication that robs us of memory, intelligence and eventually our most rudimentary cognitive abilities. The objective is to measure the effects of weekly medication injections and nutritional supplements that may help suppress the inflammatory factor implicated in the neuronal degeneration of Alzheimer's disease. This study requires weekly visits and runs approximately 17 weeks. You will receive blood tests, evaluations, blood pressure checks as well as study medication and supplements at no cost to you. Upon completion of the study you will be compensated for time and travel up to $500.00. If you or a person you know with mild or moderate Alzheimer's disease desires to participate in this study, or would like to receive more information, please complete and submit this form and call 1-866-517-4536.
Obviously several assumptions will have to be made to make a reasonable projection as the potential market capitalization. The first assumption is that the product does work in humans as anticipated. We know that there are about 17 million shares outstanding. And we know that companies with fast growing revenues usually command high PE ratios so we assume a reasonable PE of 20. The primary questions remaining are: What is the total market for the treatment and what will the treatment cost? Let’s look at some options.
1. There are 17,000 people in the US waiting for a liver transplant and that number is growing. Most of them will die waiting because there are not enough livers to go around. If we assume that only 20% (3400 people) per year take the treatment and it nets GALT $20,000 per, we see a market cap of $1.36 billion. That equates to a share price of $80. And this is just the US market. (I think the $20,000 number is certainly reasonable considering that a liver transplant costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and the alternative is death.)
2. According to the recent PR from the company, there are 15,000,000 people in the US with NASH. If we assume that 10% (1.5 million people) per year take the treatment and it nets GALT $5,000 per, that calculates to a market cap of $150 billion. That equates to a share price of over $8,800. Again, this is just the US market.
3. If you think that last scenario was too rosy, we’ll tone it down a bit. Let’s assume that only 5% per year of that 15 million people get the treatment and GALT only nets $1,000 per. That’s still a $15 billion market cap or $880 per share. Again, this is just the US market.
The eventual market for the treatment will be decided by “the powers that be” who determine what the “standard of care” is for NASH and the various other diagnoses of liver disease. I would hope that the “standard of care” would dictate that liver problems be addressed at an early stage in order to head off liver scarring and cirrhosis. However, if they decide that GALT’s treatment will be used as a last ditch effort to keep you from having to get a liver transplant, then option #1 above is more likely. And it could be that the treatment starts as a “last ditch effort” but then becomes an early intervention after a couple more years of study.
Other factors not incorporated in this assessment include; the possible use of GALT’s products to address fibrosis in other organs and its use in cancer treatments.
And of course all this is JMHO…
Thank you. I purchased 200 today. I wish I had known about them a few months ago.. I would probably have a bigger position.
But WHAT A DAY we had today!
Where can I find the details on GALTW? Scottrade does not show the strike or expiration and TDAmeritrade only shows the expiration. Thanks.
@ Echo20 - My purchases today in all three accounts showed up as a separate line under the symbol NNVCD. My original amounts in TD were listed under a number at yesterday's closing price. My original amounts in the Scottrade account were labeled NNVC# and valued at yesterday's closing price as well.
You are wrong. I bought additional shares with my Scottrade account and in two TDAmeritrade accounts this morning. I had to use a broker for TDAmeritrade but they gave me the online rate. If I had wanted to sell, I could have sold.
Luigi1 said, "I think you will find you cannot sell yet either."
What is the next expected news item? And does anyone have a timeframe expectation for that next major news item? Thanks in advance.
How could you possibly know that "he is cooperating in return for leniency"? It could be that, like most decent people, he is cooperating voluntarily with law enforcement.