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.
These are ridiculous posts. Tiny biotechs are all over the place. There is no rule of thumb on this and anyone who posts this garbage is just messing with people. You should know better. Again, your post is for newbies as I know you know better.
Actually, companies that can’t move forward but may have something most often get sold for cheap then. Your notions are ridiculous. But you just post these for the newbies anyway.
No change. All of her clients are still in it. But she has already said that.
Why would anyone except another writer at his publication, who has to do it, want to associate with that low life? His poor little ego is so tied up in dumping on this company, they’d just be feeding him more things to attack. His ego requires that NWBO fails and he has shown no ability to adapt to another reality. He’s an immature child, whose ego depends upon being “right”, even when he is horribly wrong. And in that context, he is not a journalist. All my personal opinion.
Well done.
Thanks. good luck and I hear you. I really am not commenting too much on the company. Without real news, it’s really just to chat with fellow investors.
Happy Veterans Day!
No worries. Just trying to suggest ways to think about managing the risk. I go for big plays entirely in my portfolio. But I think managing risk, both time risk and total loss risk, is easier when you have a few companies in your portfolio. And you can grow the pie and lower your transaction costs rebalancing when you have some time differential in terms of stocks doing well and poorly. I buy when the companies I like are doing badly in terms of value. After I’ve done my diligence, red means buy, green means stop.
I try never to chase.
I try to be early. Patience in a good company, can pay off well. Traders have no patience. That’s their disadvantage. They can’t have patience usually because they are literally trading to pay the rent, for income. I do not trade for income.
I try therefore to maximize my advantage.
Vegas is fun. But no one stays wealthy long if they invest like they’re in Vegas. One big ride and some will be back for more, and they may still believe that all or nothing served them well.
Once the risk is off, I don’t diversify just for the sake of diversification. Get a good bit of the ride first, I think. But if you’ve been diversifying, definitely it makes more sense to have a few irons in the fire. If one goes out, and you have everything there, it’s a disaster, for most people. Some people have parents or others to bear their losses.
But for people who think risk of 100% loss is in any stock they are in, diversification is the rational approach to balancing risk against potential return and it also lets you take profits and losses to offset them, when you rebalance your portfolio. You don’t have to buy 25 or 50 stocks, but a handful that you can manage and use to manage tax liability, is a good practice.
After the risk is off, people sell too fast. They seem to think they are buying a commodity, not a company. It’s a traders mentality. That is when it becomes a rea financial instrument and you calculate the potential value and you watch fir it to either achieve the expected return or you rebalance.
So I was not going you advice, that was for GGB. He apparently has this whole elaborate bear case suddenly. The appropriate approach for someone with his mindset is not to be putting all of HIS eggs in one basket. He can hit himself in the head later if it succeeds, but at least he will not have had the full downside risk of it turns out as he suggested in his post. People should not post things they do not actually believe, so I am assuming he believes in the somewhat intense anxieties he expressed. The appropriate move is to diversify.
But it’s also a good practice generally, as some stocks can take forever and some stocks pop early. Look at that FATE! I bought that at $1.30’s. Didn’t expect it to rise so much so early.
Diversification is good. But pick the best companies you can.
Hi Sukus,
I am not talking about taking money out after the risk is mostly out of the investment. That’s when you take the ride you’ve waited fir diligently. Assuming there is good news on TLD.
I’m talking about managing risk when risk is maximal. Once the risk is off, taking your money out and putting it somewhere riskier makes little sense.
Someone like GGB seems to not have faith in his investment. The point of having a portfolio is you can manage the profit and loss and tax consequences, reducing transaction costs, and all of your eggs are not in the same basket when risk of total failure is a good possibility.
Once a company has a successful trial, and announces results and there is an initial pop, I generally don’t think selling ASAP is really the right move. Good move for a trader, not an investor who assuredly thinks there is real value to be realized, or they’d not have invested in the first place.
That’s just how I see it. Once you remove dollars at $3, to “diversify” at that stage, you’ve got to put those dollars back to work. And you may be losing out on the ride, while now picking new investments that are also 100% risky again or have a much lower return.
If you’re paying off your debt or something, and want to have that resolved to have the peace to let the rest ride, that’s different. Then you actually are reducing a real risk of sorts.
Any tips on the orange juice crop this year Mr. Duke?
Diversification is always a good idea. I hope you’re not in NWBO 100%. But, having said that, I do not say it because I agree with the bearish case you presented.
It’s still pending, but hopefully it gets approved or is close. It may, in fact, be a unique way of dispensing the two, and it could be patentable.
However, it also could be what I’d call a blocking application, intending to make sure that no one else gets a patent that affects their freedom to operate with combination therapies. Subsequent applicants would have to prove that their application is substantially different than this prior application.
That’s an irrelevant argument, but a nice to have. They should not humor AF. This is a rathole argument. The answer is not the point. It’s not critical. Checkpoints are another drug. Those are patented. Combinations are usually patentable if you have a very particular and inventive mode of dispensing the combination.
But that is a distraction. It is meant to deceive unsophisticated retail, and maybe others, by suggesting they can’t use the drug as discussed by Dr. Liau. That’s not even a possibility as long as both drugs are approved.
These arguments taking people fown overhyped fake ratholes are intended to suggest something is wrong, when nothing is wrong. And to distract people from discussing all the positive points and put them on their heels and on the defensive. That AF engaged and initiated such debates is testament to what his mode of behavior and his motives in these attacks are really about. He’s a journalist so he understands the communication strategy upon which he regularly embarks.
While he has free speech to have such debates, it reveals the pattern of a seriously bad actor in my opinion.
Dude, you know no one can patent a cell. Manufacturing and process patents, broadly stated are where the protection rests with cellular products. The notion that they are not actual patent protection is standard short noise. I’ve heard and read this crap with every cellular technology company out there and in the end it has always been a bogus claim by shorts playing on the ignorance of retail and then also playing word games.
Nonsense. They’d disclose a whole lot more than that and you know so. That would be an 8-K event. You know it too. Quit the FUD.
Yes, you can’t revolutionize an area of science with mediocre timeliness. Anyone can hit timelines if what they are doing is not all that amazing or interesting. They have to get it right. I agree 100%.
I agree with your post. Well said.
Same posts...
I’ve seen your posts elsewhere...
Not true.
Exactly!
There are more people here than ever, but nice try.
I don’t believe much of what I read here. People have a tendency to fill any ambiguity with what they really think themselves and then to attribute it to the company, which is often quite obvious.
Exactly right Poorman. But people are desperate to make their man see relevant. Of course we would want to buy any vaccine if it proved to be effective before others did, but that promise was entirely conditions and to our benefit, not Pfizer’s except that they knew, IF effective and not otherwise, they had a sizable buyer. But there was never a guarantee that their vaccine would be most effective or first. It was the Germans, I believe, who effectively funded the venture that Pfizer backed. And you know who hates Merkel.
Pfizer Vaccine’s Funding Came From Berlin, Not Washington
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-09/pfizer-vaccine-s-funding-came-from-berlin-not-washington
https://www.fiercepharma.com/manufacturing/biontech-curevac-bag-745m-german-funding-for-covid-19-vaccine-hopefuls
https://medcitynews.com/2020/09/biontech-gets-more-than-444m-in-funding-from-german-federal-government-for-covid-19-vaccine/
Academy award...
Your acting is great.
This is how codevelopment works. The originator has rights to research and continue making it, but generally all improvements are assigned with the original rights, obviously with a promise to monetize the drug and deliver royalties.
I think people trying to raise the UCLA add on combination studies, as if they raise questions, are just looking for more smoke and mirrors to throw up and confuse people who are not familiar with typical arrangements and might be easily confused.
Schwab too!
Quarterly conference calls are not used to discuss patents and you can find all you need online. You should not be in complex companies if you can’t do the due diligence. But details like that are just thrown on the board to throw smoke, you’re not even an investor.
I appreciate that. I do appreciate you Senti and all you do here. I do honestly think we will receive fair treatment, and hopefully approval. I realize there are shady people and goings on amongst people in the industry. But I believe LP will get us through those rocky seas to sail clear and free.
And it is false as per my previous post with links.
Sorry about the lack of paragraphs. Kind of an odd feature of this site if you drop the text in from another editing tool, which I did because the site lost my previous post while entering it in the software/website directly. Oh well...
With regard to the gentleman we were discussing and the competitive landscape in biotech, to which NWBO also is subject and vulnerable to:
Patrick Soon-Schiong’s disappointing endeavors are of course, not unusual in biotech. I have observed patent holders and researchers with competitive products attacking companies with competing products over the years, sometimes directly, sometimes with pseudonyms on blogs or bulletin boards and sometimes apparently via proxy. It’s why I observe the trolling and social media patterns with biotechs to spot promising companies that might be underpriced, and under attack, because it is a pattern. Jealousy is an ancient human emotion and so is greed, and you can often see it played out in these false narrative / false light attacks and conspicuous bulletin board and blog dramas.
I found it quite gross to see MD Anderson and Patrick Soon-Schiong had both “trademarked” the “moonshot” program concept to try to own it. That was something neither should have done, but of course they were each trying to brand themselves as the having cured cancer, while letting the government do the real work.
https://observer.com/2019/04/patrick-song-shiong-la-times-owner-cancer-drug-lawsuit/
Then there was the catch and kill drama that really shows how some of these competitors operate and why people like Linda Powers, IMHO, are so important to getting drugs like DCVax ultimately to completion of trials and approval. I hope she continues to protect the company and drug completely.
Catch and Kill:
https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/sorrento-sues-soon-shiong-over-catch-and-kill-its-cancer-drug-a-potential-abraxane-rival
https://observer.com/2019/04/patrick-song-shiong-la-times-owner-cancer-drug-lawsuit/
Of course these are allegations and the rest is all my personal opinion.
It’s important to be careful...
I am actually pretty good at identifying most people’s ethnicity. I can’t speak to their national identity, which sometimes complicated things.
But I hear you.
My error. I could swear I had seen an article saying he was Korean and I never looked up his ethnicity, though his name sounds more Korean than South African to me. Apparently his parents fled China.
Interestingly, he was involved in what was alleged to be a “catch and kill” effort against a small oncology company that had a drug that his company saw as a threat...
As for his bad rep, I was the one who initially alluded to him and that issue. I really don’t trust the guy. But my point was simply that that commission was industry people and at the time he was making this ridiculous splash that made people think he was a proper benefactor and since he actually is a doctor, supposedly interested in helping the effort to address the data issues people think will be important to curing cancer, he was allowed to be on the panel and then later he tried to hijack the idea with his own “moon shot”. My initial point was that that was not the Biden initiative but the initiative of this self-promoting guy who is not really trustworthy, because he is focused on advancing his own interests.
My apologies to anyone who took offense at saying he was Korean. I was sure I had read that somewhere at some point. I just never looked it up.
I’ll note that he says he is South African, though his parents fled China. There are also people in some parts of China that are really ethnically Korean, but I don’t know if that is his actual ethnicity. I just recall reading an article at some point that described him as “Korean”.
I agree on her careful language and the apparent meaning.
He took from the money they raised. Of course money went to the hospital. He misrepresented facts around the event to make it look like they were fully donating the facilities to make it look more charitable. Like the other charities Trump had, they used the charity to create business and generosity of others at their facilities. That would be fine had he not represented it was otherwise.
They took from monies that they said were going 100% to the charity and said they had donated their facilities and services.
I’ve organized such efforts. Usually the facilities are donated, but for instance the salaries of employees and others are still charged and you might seek to get alcohol and other beverages donated.
The Forbes article speaks for itself. It is not and was not a part of the other litigation related to The Trump Foundation. The NYAG is still investigating that and other matters around the Trump businesses. Eric was recently deposed on a civil matter and “took the 5th”, which is only available if the evidence you’d provide might self-incriminate in CRIMINAL matters. Hence he signaled he is involved in much more than run of the mill civil disputes that might be resolved by a fine.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/eric-trump-takes-5th-york-001418805.html
He will likely get a preemptive pardon, though those won’t apply if there are any local laws that were violated. Since he took the fifth, we may never know the full details.
HL always sees the glass as 3/4ths or more empty.
Biden had nothing to do with trying to destroy NWBO. I expect, in fact, the exact opposite. But no person elected to office, except a corrupt person, can guarantee an outcome regardless of what is happening in an actual ongoing trial.
Rewriting the guidance on use of outside evidence, and regulatory status that NWBO may have been too early to benefit from will likely benefit them going forward. You know, if you’re this conspiratorial, then you should be a short.