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.
As long as Ford’s strong profit growth and market share gains continue, this stock has a lot of upside. New products that are innovative (F-150) and loads of new technology (eco boost) should drive sales and market share. Euro losses cut from $400 million plus, 1Q 2013 to $194 million 1Q 2014. They guide Euro profitability in 2015.. I am long F since 2009 but the buyback makes this stock a good entry point for new investors. Ford should thrive in a stock pickers market which we are currently in..
Yeah, Neph is still alive. Hopefully they will grow and we will all get rich...
NEPH could be a $12-15 a share stock in two years. They own very marketable devices.
Any explanation on what happened? Are you still looking forward to transparency?
I doubt they are clearing their voice mail at this point..
You mean all the PPS manipulation isn't what sunk this company??
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm........
It already is a "dead scam". This company is insolvent...
We'll see. He who laughs last laughs best..
Looking @ PPS today and similar PPS Spring 09 in terms of overall health of BAC; there is no comparison. BAC is in far better shape than it was in Spring 2009. This PPS drop is strictly a fear trade based on European crisis and the belief the bad mortgages held by BAC somehow will overwhelm their balance sheet. BAC is very well capitalized. I don't think their bad mortgages are as bad as everyone thinks. As a matter of fact they may be selling that arm of their business soon. BAC is a money making machine. The trading fears are way overblown. This is even a better opportunity today @ $6 dollars a share than when it traded for 3 dollars in 2009.
For all intents and purposes this company is insolvent and out of business. Those who held their shares have lost everything..
Nicely done however, your post claims all facts as you state up front. You do speculate on some based on pretty compelling circumstancial evidence.
How does one defend this company stating all will be cleared up at the "Annual Meeting" which has been canceled likely forever?
How does one continue to feign stock manipulation when massive dilution is a documented fact? "Hmmmmm".....
They cancelled due to lack of funds for Donuts and Coffee. Don't even think about a deli tray...
veno wrote:
>>The shareholder's meeting is one week away..all will be known..<<
Funny I went back and read that same quote made for the last seven years. Don't you think it's about time you might want to consider that this company is a Huge Scam?? I mean why doggedly continue to argue that EXPH is a viable company with a great future? Where is there any evidence that a future is even a reality? Don't you think investors would be diving into a company trading @ .0001? Seriously there is absolutely nothing these guys have provided that would indicate that EXPH is nothing but a scam. It's not even a remote possibility at this point. Why not admit the truth?
Perhaps this Chan email to a Yahoo board member might be what the Doctor (excuse the pun) ordered:
>>Thank you for your email. I will try to explain the randomization issue in greater detail at the Rodman and Renshaw conference. But it really is not a major issue. Remember that the trial was powered to demonstrate cytokine reduction with statistical significance and demonstrate safety. The goal was to get approved as a cytokine filter in Europe. The trial accomplished all of this. The number needed to establish statistical significance for cytokine removal was calculated to be 60 patients total. However, we targeted enrollment of 80 patients in order to account for patient withdrawals, loss to follow-up, etc. Since we achieved our primary objectives, there was no need to enroll a total of 78-80 patients (after the 22 patient sepsis pilot), which would have otherwise taken time, money and delayed our commercial launch. The trial was never designed to demonstrate statistical significance in secondary clinical endpoints.
That being said, our goal for secondary clinical endpoints was to demonstrate at least a trend to benefit in key endpoints including mortality, reduced ventilator usage, organ failure scores and others to show that cytokine reduction does in fact have some clinical benefit. We believe the data accomplished this and importantly identified those patients who benefited the most from the therapy. Those greater than 65 years of age who represent 2/3rds of patients hospitalized with sepsis and who have a relative risk of death of 5 to 13 fold compared to those less than 65 years of age (See Martin GS, Crit Care Med 2006, 34(1):15-21) showed a statistically significant improvement in 14-day survival. The reduction in absolute mortality benefit at 28 days to 5% was evidence that more days of treatment were warranted in this very sick population. Remember that every patient had multiple organ dysfunction syndrome or frank multiple organ failure. These are not simple severe sepsis patients. And based on the protocol, regardless if the patient was still critically ill, the treatment had to stop at Day 7. The treatments were limited during the design of the trial protocol to ensure patient safety. However, in actual clinical practice, we believe that physicians would most likely continue the treatment until the patient stabilized and was "out of danger" so to speak. We have received consistent feedback from physicians who agree there appears to be a protective effect of the device in this population and that more days of treatment could potentially benefit this patient population in the future.
And what does a 5% absolute benefit in mortality mean? To put this in perspective, Xigris, the only therapy approved for the treatment of sepsis, was approved based upon a 6% absolute mortality difference between treatment and control. However, the PROWESS study required 1690 patients to demonstrate clinical significance. You can easily see that if we enrolled an extra 17 patients to get to our target of 60, or 37 patients to get to a target of 80, this would have made little difference in statistical significance. We believe the better strategy and use of resources is to prospectively design and conduct an appropriately powered trial in patients greater than age 65, with longer treatment, whose treatment effect is not diluted by the much lower mortality in patients < age 65, that has the chance to show a statistically significant greater absolute reduction in 28-day mortality, rather than try to enroll more patients under the existing protocol that has these treatment limitations and has no chance of showing statistical significance of a 5% benefit. Our dosing study is a prelude to this.
In terms of the IL-6 and IL-1ra data, the data show a clear trend to benefit here. Both cytokines are predictors of mortality (See Spittler, A, Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2000, 31:1338-42 for example). Again, now that we have seen this relationship, a logical course of action is to prospectively conduct a trial with 28-day mortality as the primary endpoint. Because of the magnitude of the observed effect on mortality, the size of such a trial may be surprisingly small and relatively short.
All of this being said, do we need these extra studies before we can sell our product? Based on the physician feedback that we have received to date, we strongly believe these data are supportive of clinical use of the product today. Lastly, do we believe we can publish our data? I think we have a very strong story of cytokine reduction which is statistically significant, followed by very encouraging trends to benefit of our treatment in high risk sepsis patients that demonstrate the potential power of cytokine reduction.
I hope this helps to answer some of your questions.
Best,
Phillip<<
Dr Chan begs to disagree. He stated today:
>>We demonstrated the safe and effective use of CytoSorbâ„¢ as a powerful cytokine filter in critically-ill patients, obtained European regulatory approval for CytoSorbâ„¢, and now have data that clinicians can use today to guide their real-world usage of the device.<<
Which leads us to the next question , noretreat, when do we get "conclusive proof of efficacy"??
I have Traders memory loss. I am still in Neph. I was in zhone for a short period and I believe I got in @ 40 cents a share. This did RS and traded in the two dollar range and I do believe it did change symbols post RS. But I was in and out pre RS in the pennies range..
I was talking about another company; NEPH. I did at one time own ZHONE at about a dollar a share.
Serious news from the 4Q/Full Year PR:
>>Nephros has a meeting scheduled with the FDA for April 20, 2011 to discuss a proposal for submission of a new 510(k) application for its on-line HDF system. Depending on the results of that meeting, Nephros currently anticipates proceeding with the submission of a new 510(k) application for approval of its hemodiafiltration system in the U.S. by the third quarter of 2011 which would be subject to the FDA's standard 90-day review period. In the event that the April 20th FDA meeting results in a materially different expectation, Nephros will inform its shareholders of the revised outlook. Nephros believes that, if approved, its technology would be the first FDA-approved on-line HDF therapy available in the U.S.<<
If the 4-20-11 FDA meeting goes well this will move up.......
I thought the .02 becomes .40 cents due to the Reverse split..
Gas prices are a factor but Toyota's ability to produce cars for God knows how long due to the terrible disaster will significantly impact F PPS. They will gain market share due to Toyota's bad luck.
They get 1.2 million for Lambda. Dude do you ever read anything?
From the 8k: >>Nephros will issue to Lambda Investors an aggregate of 60,194,266 shares of its common stock and warrants to purchase an aggregate of 55,651,575 shares of its common stock. Nephros will receive approximately $1.2 million in gross proceeds from its sale of units to Lambda Investors.<<
I have perused the prospectus and I believe the warrants RS 1-20 therefore if you have 1000 shares and subscribe and end up with 4200 warrants they will RS and you will end up with 210 shares and 210 warrants exercisable at .92 per unit for 5 years. Weather you pay 2 cents or 40 cents I have not been able to determine.
I wonder why? If that is the case you best sell your shares but be darn sure there is absolutely no way you can participate. Check out the Yahoo boards. I recall discussion on this matter.
I'm in. Purchased my full subscription, 25 k shares owned currently. Schwab was my broker. I called they connected with agent handling rights offering and loaded the offering into my online account. I did mine all online. It was a snap.
I believe it's for anyone owning the stock as of 1-31-11. I know one guy from Italy on another board that just confirmed he purchased the warrants.
It will cost approximately $84 dollars per 1000 shares (1000x4.1854x$.02) to ensure you are fully participating. The warrants received are convertible within a 5 year window frame. We will either convert or let them die just like an option if it is not financially advantageous.
So bottom line....do you want to spend another 84 bucks per thousand shares to see the rest of NEPHROS cards?
There is also a toll free number in the 1-31-11 PR.
>>An in-person meeting with the FDA took place on September 10, 2010 to discuss the issues raised in the FDA letter. We are evaluating our future course of action. <<
It is now obvious to me that the FDA has requested a new trial be completed to prove SE for the OLpur H 2 H hemodiafiltration module and OLpur MD220 hemodiafilter. A successful Rights Offering will buy them another year. Shareholders are stuck between a rock and a hard place. It looks like a longshot that we recoup our investment.
I have yet to check my Schwab account. Will probably call Monday..
the 28th of February..
I sure hope someone from one of these boards attends. Last year no one attended and NEPH never even put out a press release as to what transpired..
If you do not participate in the offering your present shares will be severely diluted. Participating in the offering will dilute you by about 25%. So the bottom line is if you think NEPH has the potential to turn the company around. If you think they do you should participate. If not you should sell right now..
These small cap pharmas all trade the same. FDA approval; PPS rockets up; euphoria subsides and PPS drops. This will come back again but I don't think the first quarter. More like the third quarter when Revenues make this an obvious Bull..
Your question sounds rhetorical. I would think anyone interested in mobile handset business would be interested in MOT. GOOGLE seemingly would be an excellent fit.
In Europe they have a direct competitor (Fresnius)who also happen to own 90% of all the dialysis centers. Here in the U.S. they would have no competitor thus a huge advantage in establishing a healthy market for their product.
here's a link to Yahoo.com message board.
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_N/forumview?bn=90217
SBB wrote:
>>There is no "risk/reward" investing in Expo once you knew for certain someone was trying to box EXPH shares.
Question. You have named and described at least six various and sundry serious scams and conspiracies surrounding EXPH shares. MM manipulations (1-NITE, 1-ETMM), FTDs, NSS, the missing 400M shares and the clandestine effort to take EXPH shares to .00001. Why would anyone invest in Expo Holdings, Inc. knowing not just that it is a "crap shoot" on it's own volition simply from being on the pink sheets and not filing timely reports (or in the case of Form 3/4s, no reports at all) but that six other illegal operations undertaken by powerful yet secretive forces are in full swing to destroy the company? I won't even add to that toxic mix the fact the company has bald faced lied to it's shareholders about relatively important issues at least three times in the last two months. Betting on Expo Holdings to be successful under those circumstances is like having France, Germany, Spain, England, The Netherlands, Portugal and Denmark launching a simultaneous nuclear attack on Brussels and betting on the Belgians to come out a winner isn't it? And if if by some miracle beyond all miracles they pulled it out, you'd still have been rewarded with what? A radioactive Belgium? I don't see the reward in holding EXPH shares at all. IMHO.
SBB<<
That sums it up so well. I cannot fathom why anyone would invest or hold this stock..
Tungsten wrote:
>>This stock will be under 50 cents by monday. Get out now. <<
From Reuters:
>>Analysts expect Nuedexta to garner peak U.S. sales of $350 million to $500 million, and Avanir shares rose 15 percent in light after-hours trading on Friday.
The approval could make Avanir an attractive acquisition target for larger companies desperate for new products that don't carry the risk of FDA rejection faced by promising experimental medicines.<<
This will trade @ $30 a share in 4 months..
Not one share was traded today. That is unusual.