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.
100M shares at $1 gives them $100M and is at most 1/15 dilution. Is 6.5% dilution what you consider 'massive'? I don't. Just do the math. We're not yet at stable $1+ but a bottom at .65 has held, and the sales of the C preferred have not come with any warrant kickers. Your tale of pending 'massive dilution' is nonsense.
I think you are very wise. There is IMO no way that the change of endpoints will not be highly controversial until RA approvals start coming through. I think any RA approval will be a watershed moment in pps solidification. I've always kept the chart of CPXX in mind, BUT we clearly need for the whole market to get turned around to see that sort of movement in NWBO is what has finally been beaten into my head by the May fiasco.
That being said, with news getting out widely now, maybe a move to $1.50 or so might be sustainable just to speculate. And while that is small potatoes compared to what we longs all see as intrinsic value of the dc-vax-l franchise alone, in the current market or any market a 50% gain in say 1-2 quarters is huge.
We've been waiting for years to see the solid progress. The events of May made it clear to me that the hedge funds watch this with lots of skepticism and will likely continue to see a safe opportunity to skim off any cream when the advance in pps get frothy while we remain far from being on strong financial footing and where the longs will get enthusiastic on any advances but the hedgies will be far from convinced that we will achieve RA approval, with AF always there to egg them on. Plus the overall market Is in the toilet already and subject to getting worse if the feared economic slowdown coupled with continuing inflation comes in.
I'm pretty sure this stock will be extremely profitable for longs eventually but esp under current market and economic conditions and with the very painful experience of May I'm looking for fairly slow gains only to be sustainable for the near future. This year especially has been a 'well don't touch a hot stove' sort of experience for me.
I anticipate filing an MAA in the near term, and possible solid progress with flaskworks. However we don't know how long it will take for flaskworks to get accepted as producing product bioequivalent to the manual process, and just filing the MAA is not going to convince any serious sceptics that RA approval will ensue any time soon if at all. There will be IMO very good reasons for longs to rejoyce but the real battle for market acceptance of the value of NWBO might not come to any great degree until RA acceptance falls, IMO. Partnership news would move us to possible much more solid ground in the meantime, of course.
Definitely not so because PM made a joke about his being a 'thermos to keep tea warm',
Though I accept your point that I was harsh. A weakness of mine esp wrt those who seem to have potential yet have flaws in not reaching enough for perfection in my mind (I have always been a perfectionist and self critical when I fall short, mostly due to my upbringing with a somewhat cold serious professor father, FWIW). I've always been too wound up and I see that it's ugly.
Disagree. The reality is that they have to either get the authorized share count increased or else they probably have no choice but to do the RS as they specifically stated. A large majority of shares are held by those who understand this and prefer not to knee-cap themselves.
With the last authorization there were a large number of whining longs on the MB but in the event the vote was not even near to being at all close IIRC.
This view is ignorant because there are actually 1.5B shares currently existing plus committed (i.e. a done deal) - meaning that the current outstanding issued share count doesn't include some 100M shares of unexercised warrants and about 250M already granted performance stock options (counts are appx and off the top of my head), plus what 25M shares when the 1M already purchased C preferred are converted to common. So the current fully diluted count is already at 1.5B shares. BTW this has been discussed many times here, esp by our friendly helper exWanna, but I guess some don't read his posts or whatever, hence remain ignorant.
Hence the authorization to 1.7B only increases by about 200M more common shares, 200M/1.5B is less than 15% increase in actual additional new shares. Furthermore, if the new shares are actually issued at a higher pps, e.g. let's say at $1.80 per share, then the dilution vs current shares at the current price is only 7%.
You really need to understand the financial structure! Otherwise, your math is absurdly incorrect. Lastly, when do you think the company will reach operational break-even -- certainly not before RA approvals and ramping up demand and production capacity to reach enough production to get to break-even point? How much additional $ infusion will be needed to reach that point?
Some partnership deal could well happen in the meantime but certainly should not be counted on when understanding the current financial underpinnings and the additional financing that will be required without assuming some $ comes in from a partnership deal in the meantime. THAT IS THE CURRENT BASELINE - better understand it, otherwise, you will be making clueless judgments.
Linda P, on the other hand, wants to keep the share price down, as her warrants then get a much cheaper acquisition price.
The strike price on the warrants is fixed when they are issued, so it's hard to understand what you could possibly mean by this. As for cashless exercise, the greater the stock price the less number of warrants need to be surrendered to gain full possession of the rest.
Sorry but you are just confusing the issue. From you what you wrote it's obvious that you were not loaned anything on your NWBO position. Rather your other marginable position gave you a large margin credit that you borrowed against and bought NWBO on a pure cash-only basis. Every $1 you spent on NWBO certainly reduced your amount available to borrow by $1. I'm sure of that because that's how any broker treats NWBO as a low-priced high volatility stock.
Brokers have their own limits e.g. a minimum of $3 or more likely $4 stock price limit for allowing borrowing against any position, plus they have to see the price remain above the limit for some 60-90 days. But NWBO is insanely volatile and as such will remain risky for an immediate margin call. E.g. even if we say close above $3 or $4 for the required number of days and they start allowing margin, if the pps then moves significantly downward say even 10-15%, even while remaining above the price limit for marginability the brokers will almost certainly pull the rug anyway and demand immediate covering of any borrowed amount. They won't hesitate to turn the screws, either. Even if for example the price rises so they allow you to borrow up to 40% they can instantly drop it to zero as their sole discretion - i.e. they can and will declare it non-marginable in a heartbeat if there is any sign at all that the client has the slightest risk of end up in a net negative equity position. And they can give you as little as a day to cover the loan in full or sell stock. If you don't sell they will sell it for you.
Hence from my painful experience, I'd say that the only way it's likely to make any sense to borrow more than a trivial amount even if NWBO does become marginable would be if it gets bought out and nwbo shares are replaced with a much more stable BP stock. JMHO.
Well I wouldn't run around and shout much over shares not yet sold. It remains to be seen how many more shares they will actually need to issue and what price they can for them. I expect they'll sell the minimum they can at these prices. Once they get AR approval the pps will be higher AND they will be able to borrow $ against future sales. So far the Cs are selling with zero warrant coverage and discounted just a few % below market pps. I.e. buyers are no longer demanding a big risk premium*. That says a lot to me.
* per a qualified investor I've spoken with who was quoted a price.
How does selling 25M new shares against 1B outstanding amount to 20% dilution?
The diver posts on twitter as Gregory Zivic, MD. Aekusterer often digests twitter posts here including those by diver, eg his post # 516196.
Unlike cc's created by a person, or machine-generated but then edited by a human, autogenerated cc's, that is purely machine-generated cc's are often wildly inaccurate. VR software doesn't understand context, it just uses algorithms to translate sound waves into words. It may be that the most advanced algos also back that up with some grammatical analysis as a sanity check, but most I've seen is sometimes is accurate but at times produces garbage. That's a given.
In this day and age, I would expect anybody who watches any videos online would know that and hence read cc's knowing that except for videos with high production values, cc's are 'quick and dirty' period and often wildly inaccurate. Do some people not know that?
Dr. KA was born in Iran, moved to the UK when he was 15. Hence he has a native Farsi accent with British English imposed on top of that. His native Farsi is rather strong in the mix. No wonder many people and VR software find it hard to understand him precisely.
When there is any ambiguity by all means apply context - how likely would it be that he would 1. know of any NWBO deepest confidential commercial info and 2. even if he did, would he blab about it? IMO only the most hopelessly naive investor could believe 1+2 has any probability at all.
I'm signing off on this topic. Persian folk saying: a wise man does not turn his head to the braying of the donkey,
Whatever. It's just sounds the program tries to map to letters and words, and when there is a very strong (and very unusual e.g. not any known regional US or UK English variation) accent the sound to letter mapping is hard. VR software has advanced greatly but non-native speakers throw in a speaker who has adapted sounds and rhythms from a different language to how they speak English and errors are to be expected. This is very basic and I would hope common sense. And in addition to the fact that it's investment 101 to know that AK or LL will never be made privy to company commercial insider info.
To the VR software, it's just random sounds that it tried to match as best as it can to words and maybe to sentences. It may even include some syntactical analysis but the underlying meaning of the speech is not considered let alone known to the program. 'publish it' and 'partnership' are very close in sound! Again, a heavy and rare accent is a huge obstacle to 100% accuracy. This is common sense esp if one knows anything about software pattern matching.
Sorry, doesn't pass any smell test; relying on auto-generated closed captions of heavily accented non-native English for anything important is yet another complete insanity.
It doesn't even matter but I've lived in Iran and had Iranian friends in the US. I have a good ear for the Iranian accent as well as various Indian and Japanese English accents. He said 'hopefully it will be published soon'. The cc is random garbage here zero surprise in that.
It would be totally insane for a company outsider trial PI to be 'read in' to any company partnership plans in advance of any such deal closing and being publically announced. Just insane. It would be insanity squared for e.g. Dr. AK to know anything and then blab to anyone in public or private even if he did have any inside info like a potential partnership deal.
That kind of info would always be extremely closely held. Any leak could put such commercial talks at risk. And if leaked in any way, that's the sort of thing people go to jail for finding out about and trading on. Ever heard of Martha Stewart?
This would be blockbuster news worth a lot of money and as the top 2 company officers are both lawyers and far from stupid, there is literally zero probability of anybody even LL or KA having any such knowledge must less blabbing about it in public. Just not going to happen.
Did you or anybody else post a link to Ashkan's presentation from today? If so I cannot find the post. TIA!
Yeah but it traded almost 2M shares at .790-793 before they finally broke down the bid with a 200k share dump bums rush attack on the bid. As you know well, there is often way more volume behind the 1k bids.
I'm very curious how you knew they were going to jam down the bid with 200k sales in a row to the bid from 12:45 pm. Prior to then there were only 1k asks showing.
There are 8 bids at .788 or better, I think you must be craiji.
Free otc level 2 at insert-text-here
Last 100 or so trades at insert-text-here
Bollinger bands are so tight today, if they were my belt I could not even breathe. This is pretty crazy, but a good sign, I think. Not giving back any of this week's gains is impressive, IMO. Ready for a good next week regardless of news or not yet.
What really matters to investors is getting Dc-vax approved. We know that you deny that is possible, fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We believe that is coming and a lot sooner than you think. When that happens we will have very outsized gains relative to .25 cost basis or .70 cost basis and well worth the wait even for those who have been holding for 5 years. At .25 cost basis even .75 is a very decent 3x return even if it took 5 years. But I'm sure the likely return even to those who sell early can probably get another 3x from here.
We shall see and I think much sooner than you can possibly imagine.
Net income includes depreciation, change in the fair value of derivative liabilities, stock-based compensation etc. These are specifically called non-cash charges for a reason- they are not cash burn.
The 3rd page of the financials, the CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS page does indeed reconcile all of the actual cash burn, i.e. cash used in operating activities and investment activities (purchases of plant and equipment) also financing activities - such as loans taken and shares sold. E,g, the $ you cite as borrowed (or raised thru stock sales) either remains on the books as cash and equivalents or that part which was spent appears under the operating expenses or investments detailed in the consolidated cash flow sheet.
Sorry Mike but Hoffman has been 100% correct on this. You, not so much.
'Mannix' was the last name of a late 1960s TV PI. It's not Bosch's name.
If you want to call Dr. Bosch by his first name at least get the name correct.
I've explained this to you multiple times already. Your repeating the same wrong arguments doesn't make them any less false.
'Datalock' is not the same as 'unblinding', notwithstanding your claim in which you substituted one for another. Unblinding doesn't necessarily occur immediately following datalock in spite of your insistence. BTW, allowing statisticians access to the locked data is not the same as unblinding to the company and to the investigators. The company PRed datalock, not unblinding. You twisted, not quoted.
The date the 10-k was published is not the date of any event reported therein. Any event reported occurred within Q4 unless specifically stated otherwise occurred during the reporting 4Q. No quote supports your incorrect claim that the SAP was not completed until 3/2021. The SAP was completed in 4Q 2020, not in 3/2021. We also know this based on updates to the UK and EU trial info.
The problem is that the filings don't say what you claim they do. You are misquoting even the PRs. Anybody who actually reads them knows you are wrong,
Your example here includes specifying the date of the post-closing event. Obviously, that is required in any such case in order to avoid confusion about what happened during the reporting quarter and what if anything is being reported that has occurred after the end of the Q. This was specifically NOT the case in the mention of completion of the SAP in the 202010-k hence your interpretation is impossible. Every example -this one and your citations from the 10-k and the datalock PR you have stated goes against your interpretation on its face. No, datalock and unblinding were NOT simultaneous by any means. Everybody who was here at the time knows that is not the case. You are trying to peddle lies and everybody here knows that.
Les said 5/10 remains top of mind as well as the journal.
What is meant by 'remains top of mind'? I've never heard this phrase before, can you please explain? Note it's said in reference to one event that already occurred and one that has yet to occur hence I just don't understand what you mean.
10-k reports anything that happened after the reporting period in a section titled 'subsequent events'. They certainly have to make it very clear on anything that happened after the close of the reporting period. To do otherwise would invite nothing but confusion, hence that is how it is reported. What part of that don't you understand?
The discussion of the statistical analysis plan is included in the main body of the 3/21 report hence it had to have occurred during 4Q. It could have happened as early as 10/1. Definitely happened during 2020 FY and it's a lie to claim otherwise.
Yes, exactly my point. I think the filing being referenced by our confused friend was the 10-k filed 3/21.
This is simply a lie. They didn't report unblinding. Datalock is not unblinding. And the time period included in the 10-k is as of end of year unless expressly stated otherwise - events subsequent to the 10-k time period are expressly reported as such under the heading 'subsequent events'. Which the SAP completion was not - hence that could only have happened any time between 10/01 and 12/31, not subsequent to YE.
Your incorrect interpretations and false claims not supported by the filings is nonsense.
Shares can only be sold directly by a public company to qualified investors. Qualified is a legal term in the regs which means for individual investors a person who can demonstrate that they have assets (maybe $1M?) and/or income (maybe $250k pa?) enough to prove that they have a certain amount of financial experience, enough to protect their own interests and do not need the protection of having a broker mediate to 'protect their interests'. Not that discount brokers do that, but the regs predate discount brokers. Anyway direct sales of shares to qualified investors is allowed by the SEC but not to any TDH (Tom, Dick and Harry).
BTW, I'm not a lawyer or securities professional but I'm aware of the category and that for example with prior NWBO offering where individual investors could participate it was limited to qualified investors. Makes sense from a company legal liability perspective too.
What was your prediction on the Cs? Wasn't it something like $12 with 100% warrant coverage? Looks like this was an average price basis with no kicker. Far better terms than you expected. I wonder why, don't you?
You wrote
I completely agree w you Senti. Authorizing 10M new preferred and actually issuing any are completely separate actions. We know nobody in NWBO wants to dilute more than they have to in order to get to where sales increase enough to allow bank loans. Management is fully aligned with ordinary shareholders in this regard.
This 8-k is very interesting but until they announce any sale of the pref C shares we have no information as to how much they intend to raise in the near term.
You are simply wrong. Nobody who knows what they are doing would block the company from authorizing more shares because equity or debt financing is still required going forward until they become profitable. A vote no to authorization would be cutting their own throats if a majority were foolish enough to do that.
No such supra voting rights exist. Each perf share costs the same as the market price of 25 ordinary and gets 25 shares worth of voting rights, exactly in line with per share voting right afforded the ordinary shares.