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.
mypennys..btw, apparently the way that little pill (paxlovid) works is it stops the virus from replicating itself. It doesn't kill the covid virus, it just halts its duplication thus giving the body's immune system a chance to go after it. That's why if you wait too long (more than 3 days after symptoms) then it is usually too late for it to help that much. That's my understanding. It doesn't kill the virus, it just prevents it from reproducing itself.
My PCP prescribed them as SOC. The FDA granted it EUA under the COVID umbrella. But I believe you have to be over 50 or 60 to get them, OR have any type of illness that puts you at more risk (ex: diabetes). Your doctor just have to sign off on it. Two pills a day for five days. It knocked out COVID in 2 days for me.
Mountain...thanks for the update! Much appreciated.
Yes, I knew they had issues with marketing when they paid that no-name skateboard fellow to advertise.
Up 800% today. If we could do that every day, we'd be in great shape in a couple of weeks.
That would be HUGE for the trial, because today's SOC is pretty darn good compared to two years ago. Last month I caught COVID for the first time (I'm in my 60s) and I was pretty damn sick on day 1!! But I immediately started popping those paxlovid pills and by day 3 COVID was completely behind me. So the SOC for me last month with that pill was very, very good. But one has to get on that pill asap and not wait several days for the virus to take a deep hold. Having said that, I could have been one of the positive outliers with that SOC.
On the other hand ----- if a PR is released that broadcasts that SOBR just clinched a new, sizable revenue generating deal/contract.... we'll could see this pop to $3+, and then the prior technical charts and indicators can be pitched into the recycle bin.... and start over.
Yes, it makes perfect sense to change the endpoint. This risk is it's a moving target. In the case of rlftf they discovered that due to the evolving/improving SOC (standard of care) in hospitals, that it became harder to compete with SOC over time. So the FDA agreed to let them move their endpoint out from 30 days to 60 days. Which was still not enough to compete with the ever-improving SOC. Two+ years ago, before SOC evolved, the EUA would have been a slam dunk for Relief (and possibly for Revive too).
The key (that many folks miss) is these drugs are being compared to SOC in the Control Group. As SOC evolves and improves, relatively speaking the benefits of the drug diminishes over time. Relief even has before and after xrays (anecdotal evidence) demonstrating clear and obvious COVID improvement....however that was 2+ years ago before SOC evolved. As they say.... slow you blow, snooze you lose (unfortunately). So the million dollar question here is... how will Bucillamine compare to today's version of SOC. JMHO
That would be sweet!
Rick.... RVVTF is following the same FDA EUA path by redefining their primary endpoints with hopes that the new endpoints will help them with gaining EUA. The jury is out on whether that will be successful or not. That little trick did not work for Relief though.
The similarity between the two drugs is they are both trying to slip under the COVID therapeutic wire, and they are both tiny, foreign entity penny stocks. Unfortunately the FDA is tends to favor USA based pharmaceuticals, and/or Big Pharm in general. So RVVTF does have a shot at it. I'm just not optimistic based on the FDA track record. Nor am I bearish though.
What you are omitting is the Relief drug (aviptadil) was essentially stolen and received full EUA in India. It's being used there with patients now. Also, the NIH / FDA trial was with the IV version of the drug, not inhaled. You are missing a ton of DD. Not that it matters.
Yep....forward progress is dependent on: 1) revenues OR 2) securing financing
Because changing endpoints is not always a panacea. The FDA agreed to let RLFTF change their primary endpoint. Everybody was happy about that !!! But then after all of that fuss and excitement, they failed to meet the new, shiny primary endpoint. It's a Hail Mary. Yes, sometimes it can work. Maybe it will here with RVVTF. I'm not bearish or bullish here, because it's like a crapshoot. I can't predict the FDA's behavior either.
Having the 'safety' history of Bucillamine certainly helps with the FDA, but it just doesn't address the efficacy question. So that's the gamble IMO.
I don't know what to think about the final outcome here. It's a crap shoot IMO. I just know that the FDA does not care about what the CEOs think or feel. They only care about the study primary endpoint.
Well, at the moment this is looking like a falling knife.
Chart-wise, this has been a falling knife since 10/28/22. In cases like this support levels only have meaning to "Day Traders" who are trading who are picking off small profits (short or long) on a 5 minute chart. This non-revenue penny stock is driven by news only. The gamble is whether or not the new marketing initiatives being rolled out this month will have a positive impact on sales. What will get this PPS going is for a PR announcing a new, real deal with a major customer. The MACD and moving averages cannot predict that news.
It's PPS southern drift occurring with the lack of positive news. Investors get impatient. And there is also tax loss selling pressure. Those fundamental forces ignore what a chart looks like. They don't care about moving averages, MACD, and so on. It's simply southern drift until a catalyst comes along (news) to provide pps support. It doesn't take sophisticated technical analysis to see this coming.
Without good news on revenues we'll eventually see .50 Technical Analysis is irrelevant without revenues or some form of catalyst.
I'm not getting my hopes up for 'substance', but we'll see. Thanks
Maybe Arthur read my post. Let's hope so.
Good question.
Gov... so far this is similar to what happened to another foreign biotech that we all know. A Swiss biotech. Silence and non-progress with the FDA causes southern pps drift. Everything is hanging on whether the trial has success with the primary endpoint. Nothing else matters. Not safety, nor what scientists say. The FDA will only look at the endpoint and whether the trial met it. So the design of the endpoint is KEY. Did they overshoot and set the bar too high? IMO we most likely will not know until the spring/summer of 2023, and there will be more southern drift between now and then. This is painful for the longs who hung in there believing. I've seen this happen with many small bitotechs over and over since the pandemic began. JMHO
In light of the SEC investigation, it is wise of Arthur to obtain his lawyers approval before speaking or communicating to shareholders. He doesn't want to go from the frying pan into the fire.
That should have been 100th (not 10th). iHUB won't let me edit/fix the post though.
I'm perplexed at HOW is he paying his bills! Selling shares at 1/100th of a penny won't get you very far. And the small volume being traded doesn't support that hypothesis anyhow.
If he had issued PR communications a little more regularly showing the investment community that there still is s heart beat, then maybe he would have been able to sell a few shares here and there for 100x today's share price. Perplexing!
I'm still slightly bullish though (at these prices).
At least they are communicating with their shareholders. That's a step in the right direction!!!
At this rate RVVTF will be in company with RLFTF. None of it surprises me though. The FDA moves slow on tiny foreign penny stock biotechs. Only BF gets their full attention due to the huge PDUF $$ that gets fed to the FDA. .
If the new, upcoming marketing/advertising campaign generates potential customer interest, then December could be an exciting trading month for both swing traders and longs.
My guess is Arthur tried to say too much in the draft PR and the lawyers reeled him in on that.
Well, IMO law firms typically are not IR experts. Matter of fact, they often get in the way of CEO's trying to engage their investors. So, if Arthur is taking IR (in addition to legal) advice from his attorney...that is a very bad mistake. The attorney will always tell their clients to NEVER speak unless they have to. I have lots of attorneys in my family tree, but they never follow their own advice. They all talk toooo much themselves (advising of course).
His lawyer may have asked him to make some major changes to the PR.
Until Arthur issues that PR with some details, everything is speculation.
Won't have to wait for 6 months of earnings if over the next couple of months their marketing efforts prove newsworthy. All they need is to strike one or two major deals, and investors will forecast out the earnings.
Institutional Inflows and Outflows
Several large investors have recently modified their holdings of the business. Vanguard Group Inc. increased its position in shares of Acer Therapeutics by 55.5% during the first quarter. Vanguard Group Inc. now owns 278,215 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $807,000 after purchasing an additional 99,335 shares in the last quarter. Renaissance Technologies LLC raised its position in shares of Acer Therapeutics by 216.8% during the 2nd quarter. Renaissance Technologies LLC now owns 69,700 shares of the biopharmaceutical company’s stock worth $88,000 after purchasing an additional 47,700 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Copperwynd Financial LLC acquired a new stake in Acer Therapeutics in the 2nd quarter valued at about $29,000. Hedge funds and other institutional investors own 9.76% of the company’s stock.
https://reporter.am/2022/11/22/acer-therapeutics-nasdaqacer-shares-cross-below-200-day-moving-average-of-1-54.html
trip..with the FDA they have to dot their I's and cross their T's. One mistake or miscommunication and they lose 6 months with the FDA. And they have to try and anticipate to read the FDA's mind. Example: a stock (ACER) had a PDUFA date of June 5, 2022 for final FDA approval of their drug. Then in May (1 month prior) the FDA requests to inspect their manufacturing facility. ACER was totally unprepared for the unannounced inspection, so they had to request a new PDFA date, which the FDA set the new date for January 2023..... even though ACER quickly had the site ready for inspect within 30 days. Murphy's Law!
It will be summer 2023 before the dust starts to settle on this. They get the ball rolling mid-December when they submit the paperwork. JMHO
Thanks for sharing Mountain.
gov.. In general I agree with you. However, since the FDA is requesting 'more information, it's been my experience that that can add on another 6 months very easily. The FDA process (in both directions) is usually a very, very time consuming process.
I'm no longer looking at this as a swing trade. This recent news could result in setting a new lower support line before she starts to swing again.
JMHO
rick.. and the jury is still out on this drug. I suggest to not count one's chickens until they are hatched.