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’m not selling and plan to buy more. vs I have zero trust in LP/LG
Can you help me understand this contradistinction?
Ofcourse LP and LG have their flaws, should communicate much better and they had a hell of a lot to go through to get where we are not but ZERO trust and still buying more???
The whole risk on market is down and has been for a while (look at the XBI) due to pending interest rates hike + little buyers on no news.
I will be buying 100k shares soon again.
Like Viking said if you have dry powder buy if you dont sit tight and wait for TLD+publication
Its NOT a loss in your account unless you sell or unless you ar a day trader
NWBO is worth A. What the market says its worth after publication and TLD B. What the market says its worth after approval C. What the market says its worth after uplisting D. What Merck, management and SSM say after Buy out
Everything before that is just noise or a buying oppertunity even if its 15 cent per share
First of all you really should Google what a forward-looking statement is before you respond. A forward-looking statement predicts, projects, or uses future events as expectations or possibilities. Advent using manual production to get certified is not a project, future events as expectation, its reality. If you say otherwise then you are saying Advent is where it was 1 year or longer ago when it was just a plan and they have been sitting avround doing nothing but making plans for Advent certification. Is that what you are saying?
Second. Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 it is determined that only if the listed company includes a form of a disclaimer that states that any instance of the forward-looking statement found in their material is only true at the time it was written and is under no obligation to update such written statements if conditions change or that unexpected occurrences happen to affect the statement afterwards. Such forward-looking statements, however, must be identifiable by the use of certain prescribed words.
NWBO never used such language on the subject discussed because of my first given reason. Therefore if the manual production to get Advent certified had changed, as Flipper asked, then they had to disclose this as such.
Flipper if a plan is publically disclosed by a listed company and that plan changes (for example the intention to publish a scientific article on unblinded DCVAX L trial) then that change of plan should by SEC regulation be disclosed by the company.
NWBO has stated more than once that they intent to run Advent using manual production if that plan had changed they should disclose that..
But this is NWBO so you really never know for sure
thank you flipper verry interesting, reassuring and educational.
sounds somewhat similar to the Novocure Optune Helmet trial data publication, same mysterious data fog with the difference ofcourse they actually got approved.
Yes its not very courteous to fellow scientists. Perhaps they dont want to support the cross comparing of the DCVAX L trial data for commercial reasons, who knows..
That is outrageous tbh
Both Lindas leave nothing to chances slam dunk they call it
I agree with your market cap prediction. But please keep in mind that the 15X revenue multiple (recent ISI number) is based on actual realized revenue by NVCR over 2020 and not its prognose for 20021 or 2022 (which looks pretty grim after DCVAX L is approved).
Since DCVAX L revenue could grow as big as 3 billion, x15 would mean a MC of 30 billion in the future and at least 50% of that after or just before approval.
I believe NVCR MC has diminished because of the redefinition of GBM by WHO which should put the Helmet out of business if the FDA was any backbone they should revoke the Helmets license now IMO.
thank you for the additional explenation sentiment_stocks super appreciate it!
no we dont know that its too bad not more than 348-patients were admitted so that if needed the IDHmt patients deminishing the number of true GBM patients will 100% not be subject of a statitical relevance discussion. But I suspect the true GBM patients left will not be suspect of stat relevance discussion.
Thank you very much for answering my post. I am less stressed now I have read you answer and even more confident DCVAX L is a winner.
My take what you posted: Previous GBM trials with ONLY Methylated MGMT mOS was 21.2 months (from randomization***). The Checkmate 548's placebo survival mOS improved to 32.1 months not because of the improvement of surgery/chemo/radiation (aka SOC) as someone suggested but because Methylated mgmt PLUS idh-1 mutant (in the Checkmate 548's placebo survival) are extremely long lived. The reason why I personally find this is incredibly relevant for the DCVAX L trial is because if the increase of the Checkmate 548 mOS compared to other Methylated mgmt SOC had been induced by improvement of SOC then that, as of 2 weeks ago, could have caused problems for the KOLS to compare L trial results to SOC as we have known it over the last years. But its a relief to read its not.
Even when comparing apples Methylated mgmt +] idh-1 mutant with Oranges DCVAX L unblinded trial results, mOS of DCVAX L will likely improve significantly. Also, as someone mentioned here the Checkmate trial in the end reported an OS of 5% after 3 (?) years. Well, the DCVAX L trial will beat those results multiple times which is in the end the golden standard.
mr Dude first of all thank you for your warm welcome I appeciate it,
Im not Fudding and Im a serious long with a question about the Checkmate 548 publiaction and I though to ask here. Im sorry if that question might have upset you
And on being new. Everyone was new once here right
Im new here. I have been reading this board for months and its time for me to jump in. I have been a NWBO long for 4 years now
Mr Flipper44 thank you for your wonderful posts here they have helped me through the years to keep adding to my long position with convidence.
I have a question
You post does not explain why the Methylated MGMT was previous: mOS = 21.2 months and now 32.1 in Checkmate 548's placebo survival
what was so special about the Checkmate 548's placebo survival that all over sudden it shut up to 32.1 months? Do you know that?
Also do you think this Checkmate 548 publication will delay the publication of the DCVAX L trial results article? I hope not. I mean do the KOLs no have to take into account this 2 weeks old Checkmate 548 publication?
Thank you for answering I appreciate your answer immensly