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.
"Good ol mm games because nothing fundamentaly has changed with the company! "
How do market makers make money on a stock that hasn't traded over $20k a day since the month started? Don't they make their money on the spread?
I understand that. They presumably could have run the same trial with a more useful number of participants assuming they could recruit them.
But you're gonna leave this alone?
"So why did CTIX undertake a process that they should have known they could not complete?"
B-ABSSSI rang the same bell.
Has this Company ever been able to afford to run a Phase 3 trial?
Some have noted that compounds have been sold for big bucks prior to a Phase 3 and we know that that's true. Others have said that Leo just hasn't been had an offer that he couldn't refuse. I suspect that that's true as well.
"Replication will require tens of millions of dollars that IPIX simply don't have."
"IMO, a 2-person trial showing trial showing efficacy is probably not enough to attract suitors interested in ultimately spending hundreds of millions of dollars on K-OC."
All true and thanks for providing some support for it. But the costs of cancer drug development have been known for a long time....since prior to the initial Kevetrin studies. So why did CTIX undertake a process that they should have known they could not complete?
I'm sure.
"Can you actually still own it without a patent?"
Yes. The patent was assigned to this Company and this Company still owns it.
"What are those patent costs then if not for maintaining our patent rights? For what exactly are these write-offs, then?"
Another poster did a good job explaining how patents are accounted for. Whether the assets are acquired (e.g. brilacidin) or developed the price paid or costs incurred can be expensed (aka written off) over the useful life of the patent.
When the decision was made to discontinue the development of K it effectively ended the useful life of the patent so the remaining asset was expensed.
Another company could be willing to try to develop the drug and acquire it from IPIX. Should that happen the price that they pay would essentially be pure profit (recorded as a gain) since all the costs have already been written off.
The only question for me is why write it off? The Company has no income so there's no tax benefit. Ongoing patent fees aren't material and there's no indication that the patent has been formally Abandoned anyway.
"The Company has a net operating loss carry-forward for federal and state tax purposes of approximately $105.8 million at June 30, 2022, that is potentially available to offset future taxable income."
Not enough?
There must be another reason for the write-off.
"Does the company still own Kevetrin......Leo has never provided us with that answer."
It does, according to Google Patents.
The patent, which is the same patent that was at the center of the Aruda controversy, was assigned to Cellceutix and is still active. It expires in 2030.
Commander Leo has said "In September 2022, the Company, after a review of its assets and opportunities, discontinued its Kevetrin program in oncology due to reduced patent life and the added research and development costs for oral delivery of the compound."
In case it isn't obvious, discontinuing the program is not the same as no longer owning the drug.
"has a track record of identifying opportunities before they become mainstream" including at least one...this one...that NEVER became mainstream. A true Pied Piper with a well earned following.
What's the Application number?
n/c? meaning no change?
The Ihub page shows an increase of $0.00005. That's no small potatoes.
Speaking of which Happy St. Patrick's Day!
So we're doing this again? The mention of brilacidin in that and the other 130 items in that search is meaningless...it's merely offered up as an example of an anti-viral.
But you might want to be a little more careful in making connections like that. The inventor in this case has a history and it appears that it may involve the patent that you've linked:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/oct/18/doctor-who-advocated-covid-19-therapy-including-ivermectin-applied-for-patent-on-same-unproven-treatment
"You speak with knowledge about the company"
I draw my conclusions based on public information.
Basilea has their own anti-infective (ABSSSI) drug that they ran a successful SPA agreement trial on according to your link and if I'm not mistaken they bailed out of the Fox anti-fungals which were originally IPIX's (remember the big $18,000 score?).
They've had plenty of opportunity to hook up with IPIX if they were so inclined. It seems to me that they are not.
I've acknowledged my mistake in saying that Basilea is not a publicly held company. Feel free to keep harping on it, but it won't change the prospects of IPIX .
Basilea has their own anti-infective (ABSSSI) drug that they ran a successful SPA agreement trial on according to your link and if I'm not mistaken they bailed out of the Fox anti-fungals which were originally IPIX's (remember the big $18,000 score?).
They've had plenty of opportunity to hook up with IPIX if they were so inclined. It seems to me that they are not.
Doh! I screwed up....mark the day. Of course they're publicly traded. Maybe a little diversification is in order?
"Additionally, the ABSSSI indication remains an important element of the regulatory filing process in the US, with both studies required for FDA approval. Ultimately, this is a large market, and our analysis suggests that even a small market share should generate meaningful revenues for ceftobiprole. We have assumed that ceftobiprole is able to secure a 3-4% share of the large ABSSSI market at peak, recognising that much will depend on the capabilities of the partner selected. Nevertheless, such is the size of the ABSSSI indication in the US, even this modest market penetration suggests an un-risked peak sales market potential of $130m."
(values that market at $3.3-$4.3B.)
It was my company and my pension. I don't have to guess.
Maybe I just don't understand or maybe the rules have changed but these things are true:
The company was sold and I took my participation in the existing plan and rolled it into an IRA. There was no question that that could be done. I could have found new employment, assuming that some company would have me, and joined its plan if they had one (I believe I had 60 days to take SOME action)....I elected to retire.
I have never been employed in a company with a plan other than my own and just understanding its plan, in which I had a vested interest in more ways than one, was a challenge. I don't pretend to understand the details of hedge-fund's wife's plan or current rules and was only offering an anecdote which may or may not be relevant.
"IPIX already gave 2 anti-fungal poster presentations"
As far as I can tell IPIX didn't give those those presentations. He wouldn't have been being truthful had he announced them as such. You're free to do that, of course.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5715352e20c647639137f992/t/6410d01b01ac897313d5e20d/1678823455191/BRI+Antifugal+ECFG+poster+ECFG+3.8.23.pdf
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5715352e20c647639137f992/t/6410cf60bf82b22d43f5682c/1678823268392/BRI+Keratitis+GRC+poster+1.31.23.pdf
Interesting report.
Basilea seems like a well run drug developer with a strong, successful pipeline. Too bad they aren't publicly traded.
"Calvine Partners LLP is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in respect of UK investment advisory and arranging activities.
This publication has been commissioned and paid for by Basilea Pharmaceutica and as defined by the FCA is not independent research. This report is considered to be a marketing communication under FCA rules, and it has not been prepared under the laws and requirements established to promote the independence of investment research, and it is not subject to any prohibition on dealing ahead of the dissemination of investment research."
IPIX already gave 2 anti-fungal poster presentations that we didn't even know were happening.
I don't think so.
"The question there is the acquiring business didn't want to absorb the pension liability so you could roll it into an IRA."
Not the way I remember it at all.
I doubt it. They didn't continue with most other things, including the profitability part. A Big Board company, they failed at running a small business and it took them 10 years to do it. I'm certain they offered ongoing employees their own plan.
Maybe the rules have changed in the last 30 years but the small corporation that I owned had two plans in place. When we sold the business I was able to roll the proceeds into the IRA that I still have today.
Couldn't she have rolled her pension into an IRA where you could impart your own wisdom to direct the investments instead of leaving the job itself?
Had all of the other folks who were pissed off also neglected to look at the funds investments for a few months?
What kind of pension fund investments lost 40%?
I read about that ladder many times but never heard the backstory. Can you tell me about it?
No idea what that search was supposed to turn up but SVB tipped its hand at its incompetence......
"Sorry but there are no transcations based on your search criteria."
The dummies failed both their financial math AND spelling.
23 trades
492,570 shares traded
$7,316 dollar volume
Just the facts ma'am.
"Uhh, I think "bag holders" may be the more appropriate term."
Figuratively speaking perhaps, but even the little bags described below are getting their sellers more than $.013.........twice that and then some.
https://www.amazon.com/Greener-Walker-Waste-540-Strong-Biodegradable/dp/B07YFX41HQ/ref=sr_1_41?crid=2AWDYGEG7C86I&keywords=bags&qid=1678360945&sprefix=bags%2Caps%2C108&sr=8-41
People holding these shares are doing so by choice. They don't have to be left holding the bag, as that name suggests.
"‘I’ve been very lucky’: Jim Boeheim officially out at Syracuse after 47 years"
Wonder if he's still officially in at CTIX?
Syracuse Basketball Icon Jim Boeheim Joins Cellceutix to Fight Cancer
May 07, 2012 06:45 ET | Source: Cellceutix
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2012/05/07/955564/0/en/Syracuse-Basketball-Icon-Jim-Boeheim-Joins-Cellceutix-to-Fight-Cancer.html
If I used the term "investors" I regret it....."shareholders" is the appropriate term.
I think I agree with your mechanics. Do you really expect BM to acquire IPIX shares?
Please confirm that I'm understanding you correctly.
In your example the target company, aka the selling company, is IPIX and the acquiring company is BeaMed, correct?
"The target company's stock price usually rises due to the deal; an acquiring company pays a premium on the target shares to win the appreciation of the target company's shareholders. Thus, with the premium paid, the selling company stocks get higher and can attract more potential investors."
(If that's a copy and paste, please provide the source.)
So you are saying that BeaMed, in which IPIX has made a $4M equity investment and whose balance sheet shows no other working capital, will acquire a significant number of IPIX shares?
"makes sense for both companies"
I don't understand how. Does it also make sense for IPIX shareholders? How would they benefit exactly?
I wish I knew more about reverse mergers. Hopefully someone here does and can make it plain BEFORE something happens. Can you?
"Leo is the largest s/h ..."
Why do people keep saying that when it's not true at all?
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793222007292/ipix_10k.htm
Halted for news?
I kid, I kid.
"FDA approval on the laser is closer than one thinks!!!!!"
I didn't think that a medical device like the squalus laser got FDA Approval but rather a "clearance" and I thought the laser already had that.
What are you talking about?
This is the Company that specializes in perpetuating confusion and some just gobble it up. From the original IPIX press release:
" Squalus has invented and is developing a leading-edge image guided surgical laser platform for treating previously inoperable cases of epilepsy and for enabling new treatment options for cancer cases in multiple key specialties, including early-stage lung cancer"
They've already invented something. They're developing it. Both.
And it's a brand new concept that is sure to get through a 510(k) process quickly because all it has to do is show that it tracks an existing concept.
The White Knight is talking backwards again. Just ask Alice.
$4,950 worth of feeding frenzy. Something must be going on behind the scenes.
I don't think I missed it:
https://www.dovepress.com/getfile_article_fulltext.php?filename=article_fulltext%2Fs396000%2F396566/img/IDR_A_396566_t0001.jpg
Is this the extent of it?
"Several of these substances have shown promise in clinical trials, such as the defensin-mimetic brilacidin.4"
Regarding B-OM, also from the latest 10-Q:
"Given the low price per share of our common stock and the many multiple million dollar costs associated with a Phase 3 program, at this time clinical trial supply manufacturing and Phase 3 clinical trial conduct are delayed, with such activities pending securing sufficient working capital and/or partnership."
That should sound familiar, also from the latest 10-Q:.
"Our strategy, for now, is to achieve success with other trials and attract partnering opportunities that may provide significant upfront payments and milestone payments, which can then be used to fund the ABSSSI program."
32%? Has there been a new BeaMed investor (as this suggests: "The Company’s Chief Executive Officer and other financial stakeholders in BeaMed recently returned from a visit to Israel to see the StingRay System first-hand. ")?
I checked it out before I posted.
Glad you got a chuckle out of it but it's not likely to be followers.
If you're right then this CEO's former company has 13,416 followers (compared to IPIX's 3,370). Check it out for yourself.
"noticed that your name is mentioned over there"
only because you keep mentioning it.
"3,370 followers"
That's 3,370 posts, isn't it?
"It's better for the merging company to merge into a company that has a base of trader/investors"
Good theory, but it would make more sense if the company that has a base of trader/investors hadn't done so much damage to that base in the last 7+ years. The chart of the share price would look an awful lot better if it more closely resembled the flat trend line of the follower count. Many appear to have sold without bothering to "unfollow" or the price wouldn't be where it is.
Note that I asked why Gil Shapira would come to IPIX for funding of a new project, not just why they would go outside neo-Laser.