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 are far more experienced than me, but let me answer #2 first. That is relatively easy.
IMO, Answer #2 = 100 to 250 PPS on the day both events were announced -- increasing beyond that.
IMO, Answer #1 = Too difficult to tell, but here is the technique the hedge funds use upon a huge announcement (and let me say that if both of those PRs were announced on the same day, there is very little the hedge funds could do.) Hedge funds would also buy all the way up, and at the top of day 2 they would buy short positions. Then they would sell almost all long positions they bought all the way up in very large blocks, all the while making 'paper' money on their short positions. (Again, if the scenario was as presented in your hypothetical, I don't think we'd need to worry a great deal about a hostile takeover based upon the weeks and months of attention NWBO would garner.) Anyway, upon getting the price down to some level with their large block sales, they would then convert their shorts, and sell those in large block sales to try and drag the price down further. They would combine the large block sales with efforts to discredit the findings with incestuous media hit pieces suggesting revenue is a long way off, attack management for one reason or another and distract potential retail investors with sparkly alternative companies that actually have no meat on their bones.
That is why we need a conference camera on TZOR's head. I'm still chuckling over that. I think it would be very bizarre for LP to leave the ASCO Pavillion on June 3, 2014 without providing some early numbers on revenue from Germany.
It can be obtained in Israel for approximately $110,000.
That is approximately $36,667 per year for three years. I do not know the price in Germany at this moment.
The German and NWBO reimbursement negotiators, in my opinion, are dialed into everything that is currently going on with ASCO, Direct and L. From earlier studies on this subject, the German price reimbursement will be locked in for a number of years once it is set. This price then becomes the keystone for other EC countries who discount based upon their own GDP, and increase based upon transport and preservation considerations.
So, you could probably make a call to NWBO or the PEI to find the current price, but I can almost guarantee you that it will not be the ultimate negotiated price.
Thanks Pyrr.
This is a case of me expecting the best, but planning to prevent a hostile takeover if that window opens.
We must be vigilant. (I don't mean to sound too dramatic) Even a halt for efficacy, if that comes to pass, can be negatively spun with enough purchased media firepower. Hostile takeovers are well planned events.
I do not want the follow up to "Who Killed the Electric Car?" to be "Who Killed the Cancer Cure?"
(Again, excuse my drama.)
At some point….not today, but at some point if evidence becomes overwhelming, I will try to strike up a campaign of sorts for investors to tell their friends, family and others about this stock.
I am normally someone who never gives advice on stocks to friends and family, because I believe professional brokers are far better equipped to give sage diversified advice.
Here is why I may consider breaking my own rule/code in the future.
I think several large hedge funds control enough shares in aggregate to tamp down moderate positive price movement on NWBO. (I expected this for over a year) Over time, not yet, but over time this could provide a very destructive effect on NWBO expansion, PPS and dilution. This in turn would make NWBO ripe for a takeover.
Right now, each time good news comes out, the AF, Carrol and similar camps tamp retail and institutional purchasing down with hit pieces. This is compounded by hedge funds pulling out previously purchased shares to tamp down any price acceleration. Certainly none of us want any unnecessary financing price dilution, but over time we all agree that biotechs must frequently raise cash until they start producing enough revenue on their own.
The ideal situation is where the "rational speculative" price (yes I used rational and speculative together as a term of art) and market cap are so large that the financings have less impact on fully diluted outstanding share percentage. If this does not happen when the good news we are anticipating starts flooding in (because hedge funds keep dropping the price back down (perhaps as a surrogate for a large pharma hostile takeover [yes this actually happens folks]), everyone else is a loser.
Consequently, not today, but at some point it may be necessary to start an investor informational campaign to friends, family and Billionairs (hey why not?) to prevent NWBO destruction by Hedgies.
If that day comes, I hope you will consider joining forces.
I really liked your analogies. You included a great deal of helpful information. Also, thank you for the patient example. Good luck on your submission! See my PM for more.
We are fortunate to receive case studies leading into the conference.
Remember that slow period? Look at the current numbers.
One of your best Pyrr. The last paragraph confronts mortality and hope.
Make that 2 patients.
That made me laugh at loud:)
LTT, no matter how this goes, please stick around after ASCO and L results. I think a debriefing amongst admitted shorts and longs would be a healthy exchange. Right now, everyone has too much riding on outcome. Let's watch some game film for next season. Until then, I think most people are committed to their positions.
Your logic checks out.
Thank Heavens!
and may you and yours receive continued and permanent blessings.
Ou.
Great question, and while I certainly can't speak for the company, I'll try to explain this in short order.
NWBO's first nonspecific tumor lysate platform product was/is DCVAX-Brain (aka:DCVAX-L). Since 1999, it has been tested on GBM patients. It is administered sub-dermally.
The results for DCVAX-L are most notably measured by 'overall survival' (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). In the case of DCVAX-L, Provenge, ICT-107 as well as other dendritic technologies, the influence on OS and PFS becomes more evident 2-5 years after treatment when compared with control groups and/or historical standards. This is what is known as the "Long Tail."
So when NWBO's PR from today states,
Chiugray said:
Hi Long.
You have to admit NWBO chose the road less traveled. I hope it makes all the difference!
I owned a little stock for a while (cytx). When some very good news came regarding financing, the shorts were willing to engage in a 15 million dollar one day battle to tamp down the price increase. The company was/is smaller than NWBO.
A number of years ago, Cramer admitted he'll spend millions just to change sentiment by rapidly taking bids, etc.
There are parasites trying to change your perceptions. Sentiment seems like such an innocuous word, but Cramer confessed he made his millions (and consequently crushed others) by simply modifying sentiment. In some cases he'd spend millions to set things up, in others he'd call his media friends and ask for hit articles and beyond that, he admitted on videotape no less, that he would just lie to save a hedge fund position.
A few months ago, Diamond Jim reposted Cramer's confessional videotape that demonstrates how deep pockets with large megaphones try to modify your sentiment so that they win and you lose.
Exactly Hodge!
It appears AF will attack cancer patients for the next 2 weeks. How would you like to be fighting for your life and at the same time labeled "EXPLOITED" by AF? AF is a lost soul.
Staccani,
I know you'll beat this. Your in our thoughts and prayers.
Flip
I'm not leaving at this point and neither should you. I'm just going to listen for a while.
Thanks Fox. I promised to bite my tongue for a while. So as an aside, I already went through two or three Presidents over the last few decades that were masters at playing ___, I hope I don't have to go down that road yet again.
I understand what you are saying, but she stated they submitted "data" in the abstract, and that leads one to a different conclusion. She stated it was unusually early to submit an abstract, and that is not the case if you are simply submitting a full on tip/tps.
She did state, as you say, that they could not release data until ASCO, and that would be true in a full on tip/tps….so you are correct from that standpoint.
I just think we need some clarity. I'm stating my sincere opinion. I'll bite my tongue for a while.
It is clearly a full on TPS/TIP. No data except enrollment and encouraging statements. I think this means we will have to wait until after the poster session. Linda certainly made it sound like their abstract had been selected unusually early based upon (insinuated) early sparse data. There is a provision for this, and so I took her insinuation to mean this.
In fact, there was nothing strange at all in being accepted to ASCO. A full on TIP/TPS simply is an opportunity to share information about interesting trials that are happening. It is not an opportunity to share significant data and is limited to methods and the like.
I'd like the sun to come out tomorrow, but the reality is, there was nothing special about getting into ASCO under this abstract form.
The sun will come out in 2 weeks, so we better hear something tomorrow for my sanity.
Results will come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there'll be some….
Who moved my pudding?
Oh bring us some figgy pudding,
oh bring us some figgy pudding,
oh bring us some figgy pudding ,
and a cup of good cheer!
We won't go until we get some….
so bring some out here!
Please Sir, I want some more….[information].
OK. We Need a PR.
Look at example 3 in post 7044.
I think I meant "cannot be overstated." In other words, John's point regarding the strength of results is extremely important.
GLTA!
Before I swim along….
John, I think your points about the strength of results cannot be understated.
Just recently, Evaluate posted a link to a 2013 FDA webinar, wherein a major point was made deep in the audio -- in passing; that, very early stage moderately sized trials can be used to substantiate treatment approval where the results are "dramatic enough."
I think Dr. Chuck's replication point is well taken, but where:
"increase in the ratio of the pSTAT-5 ratio (post to pre DC vaccination) from IL-2- stimulated cytotoxic T-cells following DC vaccination reduces the risk of death in vaccinated patients by 5.45 times "
I think what UCLA deemed as reproducible results may present a "dramatic enough" persuasion.
I have to make a brief appearance to say that I had the same exact response as you -- the biomarker might be used as a surrogate -- Dr. Chuck, but I was 13 minutes late!
However, the strength of the "reproducible" results may not require additional replication prior to using it in the L trial. Just my thought.
Pyrr is actually a double agent for Roche and eats too many donuts -- kidding. I'm going back off the board, but I needed to return and correct Pyrr's story. I'm actually just a porpoise with some shares in a great company trying to cure cancer.
Now I must swim back to my own waters. High pitched squeaky sounds.
I no longer swim on this site.
Have a great day.