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.
No disrespect, but do you have any idea of what was purchased! Certainly not from what you lay out here! NWBO acquired.a lot of other services! Patent items!
Ahh, its like making an argument before the S.Ct. and you get an easy question from a friendly justice. You don't answer the question to make the justice look funny, you knock it out-of-the-fing-park with developed argument. Missed opportunity.
"Paid hundreds of millions to produce a few hundred vaccines". You are assenting that to be true? Can I get you name and address? Please. Its easy to make outright nonsensical statements when no one knows who you are. But that is really over the top. Like I suggest, an SA article developing this analysis would be smoking.
Woodford is hardly maxed out on this stock. He is holding around 1% in his equity investment fund. Its a mistake to think a builder would stop construction halfway through a project even though he has plenty of capital available (just not a prudent way to conduct business). This PIII project by NWBO will see completion for sure.
ahh, you didn't make it easy by providing links. I guess I will look, when I have time to pull out the shovel. Thanks,
Fair enough about my lack of dominion over all aspects of this stock. But don't know how much that benefits me. What would be interesting is if someone were to do a money analysis of the actual payments to these live cell production companies and finance companies to determine whether there is actually someone over-benefiting from common owner/control. Now that would be a smoking SA article. At the time these events were developing I don't know how common it was to find a contractor who could produce at the level NWBO required (which might explain build it yourself opportunity) . Kind of like expecting Ford in the beginning to find a contractor to build his engines, or any other part for that matter. Its a new frontier, this live cell therapy thing.
Buy stocks while they are cheap! Looking at arguments made about the halt, most exclude completely a stop for lack of efficacy, but a possible halt due to safety has been put forth. Assuming true, it's agreed to be likely one off issue that will be resolved without significant event! Upon explanation by NWBO the stock price should proceed it's recovery uneffected by this past news! However, all (almost anyway) admit that it could also offer some very positive information (such as convincing interim efficacy findings?). Under such a story line the stock would quickly began to gain value. All balanced, stock price is as cheap as you are going to see it for some time!! At least that is my take on the current risk for buying! Short gain or long, you have to acquire the stock to realize it!! Good luck!! Oh, lawsuits, they finally found a disgruntled stockholder who wishes he had sold at $12 but can't face the facts it was his decision to hold! Really don't think they will find enough litigants to form a class! In which case it will be a very expensive lawsuit for plaintiffs attorney!
$12 before Christmas/ Chanukah!
Argos is a pretty gem for sure!! But not sure the observations about NWBO are ligitimate. But for Woodford it would be underrepresented by institutional owners? An odd argument, like saying about penicillin, that except for effects on bacterium it has no beneficial effects! But you are right on about args, in another five years it will be something for sure! Latest SA article was quite strong!!
Did you ever consider that he thought your comments were not verifiable, accurate, or were biased. Not that I know your politics but you seem to be a little one sided! Besides its his web page that he pays for not a free forum! Did you happen to put you observations on the free pages? Would love to look at your math! Maybe that was why he took it off?
The 13G and 13F account for holdings as of June 30. If your total is correct as of 9/9 for Patient Capital Trust, the total holdings exceeds 23M, and more if we assume that he has added to the investors fund. Wondering where his limit is for NWBO as 4% sounds a bit saturated. I see a limit of 4.5% for a couple of stock, thinking that may be it.
Woodford continued to acquire NWBO stock at rapid speed! From april 2015 to June 30, 2015 he added over 7,000,000 shares totaling over 16,600,000 shares. He is still acquainting shares.
Thanks for info. I will check it out.
minor correction due to typo on earlier post. The CF Woodford Equity Income Fund reports owning 14,280,316 shares rather than the 13 million number reported earlier (Form 13G-A). However, the 16,721,392 shares reported under 13F by Woodford Investment Management LLP is correctly identified.
SEC REPORTED HOLDINGS UNDER 13G AND 13F - There appears to be a mix up in the reporting under the 13G-A filed by Woodford Investment fUND and 13F filed by Woodford Investment Management LLP. Both forms were filed 9/8 and 9/4 respectively. The 13G SHOWS 13,280,316 SHARES held by the Woodford FUND. The 13F however reflects shares held by both the Investment Fund and Investment Management LLP and thus shows a total holding of 16,721,392 shares as of 9/4/2015. I alert you to these differences only because someone might find this confusing, or worse seek to mislead individuals.
Its interesting to consider where all the money went. But I guess you have to consider all relevant facts. Not that I know them, but for instance, Woodford did comment about NWBO that he finds companies that have researchers and do that well but have no clue about bringing a product to market. With NWBO its all set and ready to go, market on. That kind of planning and execution takes money. I personally like the fact they have so few employees, that is an excellent control of fixed expenses. Does not appear to have hurt the performance either. Had the stock not fallen from $12 to $8 we would not even be discussing this issue. What does that say about the matter. So if LP comes out with strong news about the trial, well these lawsuits will just melt away, eventually.
If you start with a presumption about someone, such as he's a prevaricating short, then how do you disprove it. About you for instance. I think LP deserves a presumption of good faith dealings. If the facts prove otherwise, then we will see it. And what makes you think she would be as wealthy as g.., oh wait, you mean if she is successful with the company. Right. Just look at every other entrepreneurial guy who brought a company to success.
I have nonething against the guy, and I don't judge his intention! But I have to admit that he was a bit over the top today! Guess he really believes something! Have to admit that I am a bit disappointed to learn that LP controls Cognate. Course that company is holding a lot of NWBO shares! That does suggest, to me, that LP has confidence in future on its vaccine! Otherwise it would have been a royal flush of stock at $12. It's hard to evaluate that structure in isolation. LP was taking a lot of personal financial risk, and taking stock of NWBO means nothing if it had failed! Oh, but success suddenly breads theories of corruption! Convenient, but not proof!!
Purr, What evidence do you have that LP ownes Cognate? While you are at it can you prove the three different protocols for preparation of tumor antigens that you allege NWBO has changed? Do you know what differences these changes cause to the process! Do you know what protocol was used in the information arm? You have made a lot of unsubstantiated allegations about the Management of NWBO that sounds, frankly, a little crazy! in fact, I think defimation comes to mind. Following a noted investor like Woodford is a pleasure if it leads to profits! And if it leads to a lose, that is the risk of investing. But dude, listening to your discussion is a real eye opener. You know, the kind where people start to move to the far end of the hallway when you pass, or wait for the next elevator even though it's empty except for you. I'll take my coat please, and please distroy my name tag!!! Thanks and goodnight, no I mean goodbye!
Tariquidar may be the example of a stop for first interim review of efficacy. And perhaps it was staged for budget reasons; but that is likely your inference. Nonetheless your point has some merit. But my take was a voluntary suspension by NWBO. Certainly room for exciting possibilities!
Koman, the significance in the story is not how things ended, but that a suspension occurred because of the beginning of an efficacy study (and not a later conclusion). Merely because the study proved neg. in that instance does not cast some magical predestination to NWBO. It's all open!!
Maverick, I like your outlook (good to know your history) particularly as it pertains to the support of NWBO. I think LP has some good news to share! Let's hope it comes soon!
I know there was a lot of staging cost in that other company, but really waisted efforts. Example, changing its name really superficial without any benefits. Waist of capital! The value, for me, has been distinguishing the laser focus of LP to achieving goal, versus the superficial and disasterious approach to business by clbs.
Great to see that suspension might be due to efficacy study, or perhaps a efficacy report. Certainly sounds more in line with tone of LP's statements. Exciting!
Yes, I am not following with blind faith. I have not pegged the upside, but I believe we will see that developing over next couple months. I think holding through trial completion, though risker, might be the real play. I see you perspective, perhaps it's best that not everyone does! Although some issues might have simply resolved themselves organicly, somehow! Because it would seem pointless to raise preliminary concerns after filing a NDA (following successful pIII). But the evaporating effects of trial failure are always present, regardless of prior findings, and I am trying to consider the allocation for that risk. But as you know, trials have flaws, that is why they invented lipstick (cute expression, but intended to suggest the human factor in all negotiated things).
Woodford is locked in, could not possibly eject now; the reason he spent millions evaluating this play (and why I am sponging off his work). I have more flexibility and can choose the exposure till the end! Always a buyer available. Right now the risk reward looks really favorable. To much institutional money on the line, and too far down the road! Most shorts are merely hedges now anyway! The bet is on success!! I am sure you will play it as you like. May your sunrises always be inspiring!!
Everyone has a bit of bad luck in the investment area from time to time. Is this the new stock now named CLBS; changed the name to protect the guilty. That company sucks for sure, as they threw stock holders under the bus with that last financing transaction by agreeing to a deep discount of 30% to broker dealer. Look at the stock price for the last 2 years; I should have been more proactive at getting rid of that TP with the stock bump that accompanied the Trust grant from California. I don't know who you are blaming for the misfortune of that investment advice, but I can tell you that no body got that one right. One highly manipulated stock. Better to be holding NWBO as its got a shot at doing an NDA next year. Good luck
I guess no body reads this board anyway. But I was hoping you had some views on stock dilution. If you track share price for two years it's a pretty gloomy story! Shareholders have been thrown under the bus! Yes, to answer your question, I have read everything, or a lot, about the company! Didn't they fail a clinic trial recently? Guess that had big impact on share price also! So isn't it true that no NDA before 2018, if at all? So that means continued dilution? No? Have you hear of another method for raising funds that is non-diluting? Hope to hear back! Thanks for keeping a chipper attitude!!
Indeed, authority is helpful, and everyone uses it to their advantage when possible. Of course a thing must stand on its own feet, eventually. I suppose I could ask question like; does it matter if the process is conducted during a full moon? But the nature of that kind of question is, while not entirely irrelevant, interesting but not capable of moving the needle of debate on the central issue of efficacy. Could it effect the outcome; sure its within the ream of possibility. (please don't even respond to this hypo since its alluded to only for staging). But its not something that has been observed. I see your current debate a bit like that (assuming for a moment that your position is correct). Except, I do believe that NWBO has the foresight to evaluate through testing the efficacy changes caused by any protocol changes. It has been actively engaged in developing its process for quite some time, and appears to have a manufacturing capability second to none. The proof it has offered about its process are in such public discussions of things like the information arm. If the vaccine were totally ineffective as you allege, then that test arm would have fallen flat on its face. Certainly, the big finance boys are savvy enough to observe that kind of stumble. No?
I suppose even AF (for whatever mysterious reason he hates LP) should look at his arguments made in the past and recognize that those propositions are now turned on there heads and are counter intuitive to his position (not that I have his allegations in memory, except for the one about information gets out and that's what causes funds to buy, information that shows likelihood of success (not that I accept his insider info theory here)). I think a better argument is that all the insiders are holding stock. I have to believe they have some clue about their product, so why wouldn't they have sold off during the $12 run up. It was hanging for some time. (one might ask that about the corporate holders as well - since a lot of shares changed hands) I think its because they expect to get $50 or better, after the results come out. Furthermore, the insiders compensation is not so great that it compensates for the time spent on this program. LP is a significant talent, could have been earning millions annually. But she has stuck with the NWBO gig. She must believe it will work. I like that commitment. And, her compensation will only be meaningful if NWBO is successful. The final efficacy of the vaccine is not knowable, yet, but there are a lot of signs on the trail that success in ahead. Its a matter of probabilities, and I think there are lots of criteria to evaluate, aside from inter-formula evaluations.
A lot of big financial firms are increasing their holdings. Is tha because of Woodford or their own research? I assume they are doing their own DD. I will look at your threads later, but I have balanced the risk and don't think it's possible to conclude one way or another as to efficacy (although the info arm does look compelling). If efficacy were visible then it would be so to many, not just a few! And the accumulation trend would be less dynamic, shorts would be leaping higher. AF's argument regarding signs of success! Gee, if it was truly effective you would see fund snapping it up (not an exact quote, but with the square). Well, guess what?
Thank you for that statement. I am just like you, hopeful, and somewhat confident about the future of NWBO PIII results. I have some hurt around family members who fell victim to cancer, that is part of what drives my interest in investing in this space. But I am also interested in financial results. All things considered, NWBO is a good place to be at this price.
Nice to meet you Maverick. Lets hope we are congratulating each other a year from now about how smart we were to hold on to our investment.
If I get your argument, you look to the company public statements and don't see any reason for a sell off. First, important to note that equities are always rising and falling since that value represents what a willing buyer will pay at any particular time. Second, the news that caused the selling pressure was not sourcing from NWBO, rather from "The Street" publication of AF who noted a question about German regulators having a Halt on NWBO PIII trials. I believe AF got his information from either this page or another page that focuses on NWBO exclusively. AF made statements in the most negative light possible, of course. I do not have the dates at my fingertips, so can't help you walk through it. I believe investorvilliage has a description of this event as someone over there is taking credit for the sell off. But I do not think any discussions of theory or opinion had an effect on value (as I don't think anyone here (no insult intended) is a market/stock mover). I believe that captures the facts in fussy fashion.
I do like the post, as it speaks volumes about rising confidence. Short term outlook clouded by a news item, but overall, a growing sign of confidence; shorts see the likelihood of rising values and cover and institutional owner only increase ownership when they have increased confidence. Thanks
Interesting argument. I first note that selling at a profit is not a terrible thing. Second, the causation you allege is questionable. People are spooked by a sudden fall in value of any stock and the natural reaction is to take profit. That happens at the professional level (correction) as well as the retail level. Therefore selling was not likely the result of this page. I believe the overlap was concern about an unexplained halt in clinical trials. That was not a theoretical discussion about how certain protocol may alter the magnetic structure of the BLAW - rather it was NEWS which NWBO had not addressed. Legitimate reason for onset of concern and selling pressure. I see no connection to this page for that sell off. And the drop in value is only temporary as the trial is ongoing and no negative news is on its way (as the company has stated that all is good (or that is my interpretation)). And the current dialogue is interesting, but really doubt that any normal (no insult intended to anyone) person would bother reading the fine print of these ongoing disputes. This debate is like most others that take place here, they add color and interest, but prompt someone to sell. Doubt it!
Well that does raise some concern about this dialogue; potential for misinterpretation. However, we are fortunate that a PIII trial is ongoing currently and with any luck will conclude successfully next year. I don't think anything on this page will alter that result. And aside from the few people who visit this page, misinterpretation will likely have no impact.
Furthermore, I believe most people visiting this page wouldn't step into these discussions, even though they are real page turners. Investing shouldn't be that much work. Most will be like me, and say if its good enough for the world famous investor Woodford, then its good enough for me.
So I don't see the danger, really. Finally, I simply do not believe the current conversation has any proof hidden within it. But its interesting to see the effort.
Maybe I should correct myself. I am an attorney, had dinner years ago with a famous attorney (MIT Eng. Grad) who broke the case for a Tort claim regarding Aircraft that had wings kept falling off. As he poured over blueprints he discovered that during development the plane had increased wing size and weight carrying ability, but the engineers failed to increase the wing bracket size. He was so filled with fear at the discovery, he ran from the building. Later he thought that was a ridiculous thing to do, but showed the degree to which the issue had eluded everyone. Perhaps you cats will stumble upon some issue. And its interesting to see the fever at which you embrace this process. So good luck.
Gee, I thought that was the reason for a PIII trial. If you can establish it by backing into the process, why doesn't everyone do that. Regardless, its educational to read this stuff. Raises the bar for everyone. But doubt that you guys have anything to corner the market. Thanks for the reply. Like you civility.
Wow, you guys really know how to keep an argument interesting. I think, truthfully, it really adds to the color of this page. But, if I can ask a really simple question; What do you hope to prove by dredging-up the exact protocol of tumor handling and antigen identification/presentation?
No, I meant it that way. Thought it made as much sense as what you been arguing today.
No doubt, risk is present in every investment. But, pardon me, you certainly do not sound like someone with a handle on the probabilities. And I kind of like the Texas expression: money talks and bull^^^^^ walks.
I will follow the money, that would be Woodford. Thanks anyway.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2014/34-73105.pdf (copy and paste to web)
Something tells me they are not "similar" types of investors!
Woodford has stated publicly that he thinks NWBO has a lot of promise. And his willingness to buy on the open market highlights that belief. These other guys look like vulture funds, or something close, who provide financing for deep discounted stock, or worse, violate the SEC rules to make a buck (read on from selected cite). My guess is that they could sell their investment and clear a good 50% profit.?? But that is speculation.
I guess, your right, all you are doing is speculating on speculative facts, while others speculate in an opposite direction, so you are speculating twice removed. Carry on!
Hey, how is that "how many angles can dance on the head of a pin" argument going? Doing a reality check, Woodford's investment looks pretty bullish. In fact, please identify another fund that has a similar bet on a Bio stock. It appears he is adding while the stock is cheap. Given he makes a living out of investing, for himself and lots of other people, I find this confidence very interesting. He, no doubt, has all available public information and an interpretation by qualified thinkers. Let me think, do I consider the angle issue or Super Confident Proven Investor Woodford as the basis for my stock purchase here? Angle, of course, right?
Stock dilution coming! Only way CLBS can raise capital is by selling stock! Investor might lend money at $1.00 per share! I don't see the upside for this stock! Heck the executives compensation is 5 ? percent of current asset value. Don't see how they fund clinical trials! Two years before trial completion. How does one make money on this stock?
Sorry pal but shorts don't get compensated in this type litigation!
Might even be able to buy a coke ? Class action has to be certified by a judge, and since no atty has even seen a judge yet we know that has not happened! Whole thing could get thrown out! No worries! Hard to certify a class of one! Maybe two?