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 made a mistake. I attempted to remove it twice.
Sorry. Good catch!
As you might have noticed IPIX has now acknowledged its lateness:
"Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the “Registrant”) was unable, without unreasonable effort or expense, to file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the “Quarterly Report”) for the period ended September 30, 2023 by the November 14, 2023 filing due date applicable to non-accelerated filers due to a delay experienced by the Registrant in preparing its financial statements and related disclosure to account for recent changes in the business, and to a lesser extent as a result of the recent change in the Registrant’s independent public accounting firm. The Registrant anticipates that it will file the Quarterly Report no later than the fifth calendar day following the prescribed filing due date."
It will be interesting to see what this entails: "disclosure to account for recent changes in the business".
The 10-Q is now late. Who wants to be first to say "So what!"?
Maybe if they spent a little less time crafting promotional press releases they could get their filings done on time. The 10-K was late and as of 13 minutes ago the 10-Q is late.
"$NNVC - profile update out tonight
on Insider Financial (8 PM), ready for tomorrow's open."
How do you know that?
https://insiderfinancial.com/
IPIX
Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (PK)
0.0079
0.00 (0.00%)
Volume: 126,714
Total Trades: 22
Dollar Volume: $ 969 (That's a lot of cans and bottles!)
You're not the first to backpedal on a threat like this but you're definitely the fastest:
"I’m back to where I’ll spend less time on iHub but I’ll check on your daily ‘own’ every so often."
Sunday, November 12, 2023 11:51:37 AM
A person who held 4,000,000 IPIX shares on 11/10/21 and who holds 4,000,000 IPIX shares today saw the value of those shares go from $1,520,000 to $32,000.
Jeepers.
Chalk it up to intellectual curiosity. It just seems to me that an awful lot of shares had to be absorbed in the last 3 years and you seem to stand out as the only board member laying claim to anywhere near 1% of them. I wouldn't expect everyone to be as forthcoming as you have been....perhaps due to embarrassment....but I'm just trying to fathom the distribution. I don't give a rat's fanny who owns Ipix shares in terms of individuals but rather the profiles of those shareholders...retail vs other.
Do you think a significant piece of the other 396+ milion shares is in the hands of individuals like yourself? Are you not curious?
Sorry...it seems to be restored.
I seem to have lost the Classic view on my stock boards. How do I restore it?
"all but stated outright"
That's an oxymoron. One either states something outright or one doesn't and in this case I did not.
The IPIX daily stats speak for themselves and new investors can think for themselves. Those facts alone provide a solid explanation for the depressed share price.
I failed to post the stats for the last several days and appreciate the reminder. I'll get back to it and supplement it with a link to the IPIX Edgar listing and maybe the website. Will you be noting the likelihood that they will discourage new investors as well?
Don't blame me. New investors can't be faulted for responding with their feet to the IPIX failures to perform.
"My theory was that many had seen 95 percent plus capital destruction, so why sell."
I'm sure that's true. It's just hard for me to see where all that accumulation could have occurred.
Half of the outstanding was issued in the last 3 years, many at prices over $.20. That's $50M invested at retail. Is it reasonable to think that those investments are represented here?
One investor says they hold about 4 million shares which are worth $32,000 today and were worth $120,000 a year ago and $1.2M the year before that.. That's a large investor in the context of IPIX and I don't think there are too many others like them.....definitely not 99 of them.
What's your point? You've made this known before: "I HOLD almost 1% of the 400 million you speak about."
I know full well that trading in these shares is extremely light absent news or a significant financing transaction.
It's not a trick question:
Are you saying that the 99% of the 400M shares in question that you don't own are HELD by other retail buyers?
It was a serious question. The tens of millions of shares effectively laundered through Aspire and Kips Bay (they only hold a small portion of those that they bought) ended up somewhere. Are you saying that they are simply being HELD by retail buyers? 400 million of em?
The bigger question is "Who's holding all the shares?"?
There are 500M out and less than 100M of those can be easily accounted for between insiders and Kips Bay.
This was a good question: "You really think the board has any influence over share price?".
And this was a good point...."the overlap btw people that invest solely because of info from a message board and the ipix shareholder base is high"......if the shareholder base is defined as that portion of the shareholder base that participates in the board(s).
I find it hard to believe that the percentage of the unaccounted for 400M outstanding share that is in the hands of message board people is very large (am I wrong about that?) and have always wondered who might hold them. Millions of shares were issued to and sold in the open market by various financing entities but there doesn't appear to be any concentration of shares in the hands of any known entity. Either that or beneficial ownership forms haven't been filed.
"If a major pharma were observing ___ ___’s work I doubt they’d be telling us about it."
That's true. And it has been true for years no matter how you would have filled in that blank. My comment wasn't restricted to the most recent lack of reported interest:
"There is no evidence that Brilacidin has drawn any interest from a major pharmaceutical firm, leaving in question whether it has in fact been shown to be "very safe with good test results". For the most part, SO FAR, those who believe that to be true reside here and the strength of their conviction can be measured by the share price."
The number of times that we have been told of some interest is precisely equal to the amount of times that we've been told that no details could possibly be revealed. We do know, however, how many deals have been struck as a result of all of that interest.
I did watch the presentation btw and IIRC there was some background chortling in response to "When talking about testing a drug combo Dr Goldman mentioned the test mice being “unhappy” for awhile and later said “they didn’t die” in a positive tone."
I think he even smiled a little when he said it. I guess a lack of death is a pretty good measure of safety :o)
"He also mentioned that if needed they felt the B dosage could be increased."
He did mention that for one indication....after he indicated that they had reached the safe dose in another.
"NASDAQ blunder"
It sure looked like a blunder, didn't it? I don't think it was. I don't think the CEO wanted to secure that listing at all. The evidence is in the listing standards themselves.
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/assets/initialguide.pdf
Failures in the Financial and Liquidity Requirements are the least of it. I believe it was the Corporate Governance Requirements that drove the "blunder".
Requirements like:
The company is required to have an audit committee
consisting solely of independent directors who also satisfy
the requirements of SEC Rule 10A-3 and who can read and
understand fundamental financial statements. The audit
committee must have at least three members.
The company is required to hold an annual meeting of
shareholders no later than one year after the end of its
fiscal year.
Shareholder approval rules generally require companies to
obtain approval from shareholders prior to issuing
securities in connection with: (i) certain acquisitions of the
stock or assets of another company; (ii) equity-based
compensation of officers, directors, employees or
consultants; (iii) a change of control; and (iv) a 20%
Issuance at a price less than the Minimum Price.
The Company could have been doing those things voluntarily in the interest of transparency to its shareholders but it hasn't.....as a Nasdaq member they would be requirements.
No 3 independent director audit committee.
No annual meeting for years.
No vote on BeaMed acquisition, equity-based compensation.
Rulers don't like to be told what to do.
Hold on. You think it's easy to pick fly excrement out of black pepper? Given the volume of excrement expelled by the local flies I think you might want to reconsider.
Forget the silly analogies. There is no evidence that Brilacidin has drawn any interest from a major pharmaceutical firm, leaving in question whether it has in fact been shown to be "very safe with good test results". For the most part, SO FAR, those who believe that to be true reside here and the strength of their conviction can be measured by the share price.
"Voicing an open mind to the early results of new applications such as B in conjunction with other drugs against fungi is met with immediate derision and scorn."
You should tell that to the person who initiated the discussion with an absurdity:
"results that showed it facilitated the workings of most other drugs"
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173190216
"Wouldn't one think that a drug mentioned as very safe with good test results that showed it facilitated the workings of most other drugs would be something a BP would take a shot at for a few measly millions?"
Of course one would. And one would also think that they would make the assessment that said drug was "very safe with good test results" very carefully. And they would be very careful to avoid mistaken conclusions like this one:
"results that showed it facilitated the workings of most other drugs"
Brilacidin has shown nothing of the sort.
I'm tired of READING poor information and misinformation. This statement was and is 100% accurate:
The CEO doesn't have any Class A shares.
His wife has Class A shares.
He has debt that COULD BE Class A shares (at $.50 each).
He has options that COULD BE Class A shares (at $.10 and $.24).
He has Class B shares that COULD BE Class A shares.
But he doesn't have any Class A shares. So you have lots more tradable shares than he does. Kips Bay has more votes than he does. He also seems to be avoiding sharing any info with the public that he's not obligated to share by the SEC. Transparency anyone?
As far as this is concerned....
"It is similar to your Dr. Goldman presentation story: Throw a negative Ipix suggestion on the wall and hope it will remain."
...maybe the CEO hasn't mentioned it because Dr G didn't present any information that wasn't published in April:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-37573-y
And if I had hoped that my concern that a presentation hadn't occurred would remain I wouldn't have been the first one here to provide a photo of it:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173162881
I would have thought that you would beat me to it....I asked you about it at least twice and you stayed mum.
"The serious Ipix investors hold their many shares and wait like Kips Bay."
The CEO doesn't have any Class A shares. Guess he couldn't wait?
What a great idea!
"Frenchbroad's statement was factually accurate." So what? I never suggested otherwise.
Your input is every bit as invaluable as the lack of substantive information about the brilacidin presentation provided by Dr. Gow.
I believe I made a few points. You either missed them or dismissed them but I believed them to be valid points.
The sequence of events:
In JULY a link was posted to an October 23 meeting on this board. There was nothing in that post other than that link.
Between the time of that post and the meeting itself there were a dozen posts promoting it.
I believe that the Company itself never mentioned it during that time. (Feel free to check me on that.)
In spite of the anticipation of of the meeting 10/23 came and went without a mention of it here and on 11/2 I posted this:
"I'm not convinced that a presentation even occurred. No one has stepped up to confirm it in spite of all the hype beforehand.
Frenchbroad...can you confirm it? Can anyone confirm it?"
No definitive response was provided by ANYONE until on 11/5 olden_grumpini opined "I think the Dr. Goldman presentation at TIMM went as planned" and referred to a photo of the TIMM X feed that purported to show it.
I signed up for X and posted the photo itself yesterday, establishing hard evidence that the presentation was made for the first time on this board (something promoters of the meeting had obviously failed to do).
Then yesterday, after failing to provide any response to my query about whether the presentation occurred (aka "no information"), Frenchbroad posted this: "Dr. Gow posted information about the Brilacidin presentation and a photograph of Dr. Goldman in his Twitter account."
Dr. Gow had actually posted that "information" to his X account on the day of the presentation!!! If only we had known.
My issue was with what was being described as "information about the Brilacidin presentation" when in fact the only information provided was that there was one.
As of this moment there have been zero details provided about the presentation by CEO Leo Ehrlich or anyone else. If you can offer a suggestion as to why that might be the case I'd love to hear it. Perhaps he felt it didn't include anything newsworthy.
IPIX
Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (PK)
0.0069
-0.0015 (-17.86%)
Volume: 704,118
Total Trades: 45
Dollar Volume: $ 5,520
"Now you assert that Dr. Gow posted information about the Brilacidin presentation but fail to provide that information...."
And here's why. This is all he said:
Neil Gow
@neil_gow
Oct 23
Gustavo Goldman describes how the host defence peptide brilacidin strongly synergies with caspofungin in inhibiting Aspergillus and a range of other fungal pathogens.
That's some serious information.
Earthshaking revelations all around.
"The suggestion maybe Dr. Goldman never presented Brilacidin in the Athens conference is an other silly try to hope Ipix investors will chase their tail and worry."
It was an open question to you and others, only posed because the Company never confirmed that the presentation had occurred. It was never answered definitively until I did so myself today.
Now you assert that Dr. Gow posted information about the Brilacidin presentation but fail to provide that information....
I put your post through Google Translate and it came back "Language Not Recognized".
"It's amazing you would question someone who's posts have been mostly leaning to negative."
Who's that?
"Did Absentee Ehrlich even mention the presentation or was it Frenchbroad? Can't recall."
Neither. First mention was at https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172415276 . Your guess is as good as mine as to how that happened.
I don't think Ehrlich has mentioned it YET.
Thanks for piping up o_g. I was almost tempted to go to X to confirm but I have privacy concerns. Your qualifier ("I think....") still has me a little bit concerned. Please let me know if you would be comfortable enough to take it to "I'm quite sure" (which would be good enough for my purposes) or if you run into any other evidence. I'm still thinking that the Company or something Googlable should be telling us more about the presentation itself or at least confirming its occurrence.
ps. Cummins made an interesting information filing on 9/26. I'm sure you'll be able to find it if this link doesn't work (I have the feeling that it won't):
https://www.masscourts.org/eservices/searchresults.page?x=UgjsoEaRLtIunC2DigxCihQKZwnw4WXt8Fw7BX3CiDF1wSv7P9IzVQAFHerBl5S4TYqCLyJfVEj-rn3mRnhMrKOHlEQv4AQaJCwsLZoIon2YJAE8XaUW-P0f-SCOB0dZJo7zYdgEoAOYCwPOfv3fWeicsmqD0IsWOsyWfSwc3ea6wkG36Mv4F5omIEqGPy3F8*D6HMtwAgi6DB7*dFOWQg&antiCache=1699202039277
There seemed to be a whole lot more to like about this Company on Monday, November 18, 2013 at 4:15:49 PM.
Here are the IPIX press release headlines from that year that remain on ipharminc.com after the CEO stripped the website of the releases that he preferred that the public did not read...a shady move if I ever saw one:
December 20, 2013
Cellceutix Files Orphan Drug Designation Application for Brilacidin for Oral Mucositis with US FDA
November 04, 2013
Cellceutix to Pursue Significant Conjunctivitis and Keratitis Ocular Markets with Novel Antibiotic Brilacidin
October 28, 2013
Cellceutix Enters into New $20 Million Common Stock Purchase Agreement with Aspire Capital Fund, LLC
October 21, 2013
Cellceutix Structures for Significant Growth in Upcoming Year
October 14, 2013
Cellceutix Drug Brilacidin May be the Key Antibiotic on the Horizon for Serious Skin Infections; Plans to Start Phase 2b Study in January 2014
October 10, 2013
Cellceutix Antibiotic Brilacidin Chosen by Elsevier as “Top Project to Watch” in Infectious Disease
September 24, 2013
Cellceutix Plans Phase 2b Trial of New Antibiotic, Reports Fifth Cohort Complete in Novel Cancer Drug Clinical Trial
September 16, 2013
Cellceutix Completes Acquistion of Polymedix Assets
September 09, 2013
Cellceutix Acquires PolyMedix Assets from Bankruptcy Court, Gains Ownership of Two Clinical Stage Drugs, Multiple Compounds, and Equipment Assets
As of this moment the next listed press release is from February 14, 2011. Two and a half years of history gone without a trace.
As you can see there were plenty of stories told prior to November 18, 2013....even without including the erased Kevetrin and Prurisol PR ticklers and pump job interviews (e.g. https://seekingalpha.com/article/1273221-an-interview-with-leo-ehrlich-cellceutix-ceo)....that could have led a person to say "It's a great time to be a shareholder!".
Things are a bit different today, aren't they? The share price sure is:
Monday, November 18, 2013 at 4:15:49 PM......$1.67
Friday, November 3, 2023 at the close......$0.0084
Can you say that "It's a great time to be a shareholder!" today?
Shouldn't a person who has watched or invested in the Company during that period be thinking twice about that? I haven't heard anybody say it lately.
"Now you want some to believe maybe Dr. Goldman never made a Brilacidin presentation in TIMM conference."
I'm not interested in convincing anyone of anything. It's telling that you would accuse me of that rather than assure me that it happened (which is all that I've been asking).
You STILL haven't answered the question:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173146748
...and btw if your answer is "yes" you can expect to be asked how you know.
"But you can take the effort to count the number and USD value of all Ipix trades for that day?? "
It's funny that you think that I would go to the trouble to do that. In fact, both statistics are provided by Ihub and just a single click away from the page that you're looking at.. I'm surprised that you didn't know that.
"The reasons for your huge obsession to Ipix affairs has interest for me only because you want my large Ipix investment to fail."
That's just not true. I understand your anguish but it's self-inflicted and I do not revel in it.
"The all-time nitpicker forgot the plus sign." Look to the right. My source didn't use one.
0.0084
I agree, but my posts reflect a direct and unedited copy and paste of the data in the Ihub box. On the days such as Thursday Ihub uses minus signs to indicate the downward price movement. On Friday they expect the reader to understand that the absence of a minus sign indicates that the data is positive. (The parens can add confusion to some....talk to Ihub)
"In your Thursday Ipix summary you report:
Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (PK)
0.0062
-0.00135 (-17.88%)
In your Friday Ipix summary you report:
Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (PK)
0.0084
0.0022 (35.48%)
Here is the correct Friday Ipix summary:
Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (PK)
0.0084
+0.0022 (+35.48%)"
The problem lies in the failure of the copy and paste function to pick up the upwards pointing arrow on those days on which the share price increases. As you can see there are no plus signs in the Ihub original...you had to edit them in.
I won't be editing the copy and paste job when I post the stats in the future. Obviously you can provide your own edited set if you like....I wouldn't complain if you did. Meanwhile on the same page that my post appears there's a chart immediately to the right of it that makes the direction of the daily price movement quite clear, so anyone who finds my stat presentation false or misleading has ready access to a clarification.
I have been taking the liberty of adding the Dollar Volume of the days trading. I think it shows that the price movements lately, regardless of direction, have been accompanied by pretty dinky little dollar investments and it is that situation that must change before ANY price movement is considered meaningful....that's why I added it.
If you don't want to post your own set of daily statistics but would like me to add a statistic to mine just let me know what it is and I'll consider it.
ps. In case you missed it I'm still curious to know whether you can add anything to resolve this mystery:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=173146748