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.
This was a pretty mean trick but the prank worked.
It’s been like the Dead Sea for some months now.
These positive events are expected and more likely than not yet unfortunately if NWBO is given the smallest percentage change to whiff on hitting a softball they find a way.
The key is getting gains like this AFTER big news. Anything gained this easily is lost even more easily.
Hopefully NWBO hurries the hell up and consolidates these gains with Real News (properly amplified) instead of letting the hard work of shareholders to build a rally wither away (again).
I am assuming impending does not mean ‘no more than 30 days or less’ to you, or you wouldn’t have switched from imminent which I defined in those terms.
So what does impending approval mean to you?
No more than 30 to 60 days or less?
No more than 120 days or less?
Some of your supporting points are worth considering but the ‘ bashers are working overtime so something game changing is about to happen argument has been proven wrong way too many times in the past 10 years.
I would argue that alleged pumpers attacking alleged bashers or lots of happy talk is much more of a proven indicator another cliff is coming for shareholders. Maybe this time will be different but if NWBO does not submit to MHRA this month, there’s the next cliff and it’s a lot harder to climb back up.
Actually we would be better off getting a run up after news than before news. Most of the run ups we’ve had in anticipation of news have been given back. Whereas if we get a run up in reaction to existing news in the bank we are more likely to have the new SP as the floor.
No rocket science is required to say “We plan to submit the completed application to MHRA on or before [insert date]” and slap the disclaimer at the bottom of the whole PR.
They didn’t do anything resembling that and talked in terms of how long sub steps would take and then as we’ve seen here, different folks generate different dates when they interpret that.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that creating confusion or at best ambiguity rather than clarity is the point of how NWBO words their PRs.
So since it was clarified, by what date did NWBO say they planned to submit to MHRA?
PRs can be used to convey information and I doubt anyone here even knew that NWBO would be discussing a publisher at all until it happened.
As soon as NWBO invoked the publisher they opened the door to needing to provide a clear explanation because they named it as a significant factor. They could have used nice language and avoid blaming while still being clear. Furthermore, they did not even name the publisher either to Senti or in the PR.
As an added note, there are other forms of communication with everyone, like quarterly conference calls but NWBO does not employ them.
Senti is not a pumper in that she genuinely believes what she is saying.
She is not being paid to share her opinions here nor do I believe believe she is pumping to manipulate and then trade on her own account.
I would be perfectly fine if NWBO used an email to shareholders and accompanied it with a simultaneous regulatory filing (if necessary) to avoid legal issues. I’ve suggested that approach for keeping shareholders informed in a lower profile way.
Sentiment was provided new information and not just spin or ‘color’ on existing, publicly available information. With the way NWBO works any extra complexity has a tendency (until proven otherwise by events) to make things take longer. That’s why it’s relevant and not something that should be told to some and not others.
Let’s see NWBO make several clear projections and then follow through and meet them before we start believing they are changing their ways. Expecting NWBO to make correct projections going forward based upon a phone call with Mr. Innes was like expecting great things to happen soon because Les was ‘upbeat.’
Only if they informally disclose it to some non-inside shareholders.
Quit trying to normalize how NWBO communicates.
It might be legal but much that is legal is wrong.
NWBO only brought up the fact they were using two contractors (a publisher and a consultant) after things went wrong and if Sentiment’s understanding was accurate. I don’t recall their role being mentioned in the August 2023. One of my issues was that they brought a new element into the equation after they let us down again. I might have blamed them on October 13th for hiring a lousy contractor but not seen it in as bad a light.
Nothing about this was in the PR however. Why are we only hearing about it now and unofficially?
Timing is as much a part of a prediction as the event itself - ask anyone who bought NWBO options back when they were being sold.
Hopefully that is what it means. The only way to know is to see how long things take since we’ll never find out what is really going on directly.
Are the parts fully modular? If not then the publisher really cannot finish what they have until NWBo gives them everything. That would mean the clock has not started on the publisher’s work and it is worth noting that December 2023 has four weeks and by the time we get anything in MHRA’s hand no progress on their end will even start until 2024. This is a lost year now, even if NWBO announced the publisher had it all in their hands this afternoon.
On October 13, 2023 were told we would get an update when the application was in the publisher’s hands and not when it was only partially in their hands. We were told this would be followed by announcement of submission to MHRA.
The reason for NWBO saying this would have been to address the concern of an open ended process with no clear milestones.
The ‘in the hands of the publisher’ PR should have let us say “Okay, for real, the clock is at least ticking on submission to MHRA with no more bullshit.”
Instead this the ‘majority of the application’ crap we are still abandoned in uncharted territory by this management team.
What does majority mean?
Is the time that the remaining part takes less or a lot more than the parts already given to the publisher?
Is the missing piece creating bottlenecks at the publisher?
I know you’re in the tank for management and if we were waiting on submission to MHRA in 2024 you’d still be excusing this stuff but can you at least see why many shareholders are rightly fed up with this decade of stringing along?
It’s virtually EOY 2023 and we had better have had the IP front locked down. Three years from data lock should already be talking about the first returns from commercialization by now, when the Phase 2 of Direct will start and not worrying about another patent which us not going to impact the low SP.
Pedes is just engaged in teasing desperate NWBO shareholders starving for news at best.
Kilobytes are free and there is no reason this clown cannot share their reasoning/evidence and the reason these key elements are missing is because this person has neither seen nor heard anything or analyzed publicly available information and made an argument on that basis.
It is hard but do not feed these folks.
So in other words NWBO said one thing on the record in a PR to explain the delay and (if you heard Mr. Innes correctly) they are saying another thing in private to one shareholder at a time.
Dr. Buzdar is never going to run into trouble for critiquing in an interview how NWBO communicates about an unapproved product even if Direct were approved tomorrow, (.which it won’t be). If you can show that Buzdar attacked Direct scientifically he might get dinged.
So yes, he won against NWBO. NWBO did what Dr. Buzdar apparently wanted - they greatly scaled back discussion of Direct.
When someone gets what they want and will suffer few repercussions that’s winning.
Dr. Buzdar never endorsed the grapefruit juice remark and his issue seems to have been what he regarded as hyping a product very far from approval which even in 2023 Direct still is (five years at least and that’s being generous).
I disagreed with Buzdar then and now and in my view NWBO should have just kept communicating.
Agreed the ship of us getting what we deserve sailed on October 5, 2020.
If NWBO wants to handle it professionally they can. What we don’t need is a crazed shareholder mob as happened with Buzdar.
Look I am not saying Dr. Buzdar should have won but that he won, fairly or unfairly, like it or not.
If NWBO shareholders want to force SNO to circle the wagons and have a repeat they can do that and find out.
The key is for this article not to serve as an excuse for management to delay by one day the filing with MHRA. Either our JAMA article is worth something or it isn’t and this is the situation we supposedly waited on it for.
The history shows this is a bad idea for NWBO shareholders which might be why you are suggesting it.
No thanks!
NWBO just needs to apply for approval from MHRA promptly and let the positive decision be the rebuttal.
If Dr . Buzdar had been a long time critic of NWBO who mysteriously went silent after the controversy then your suggestion (without proof) that he was advised by MD Anderson to shut up about NWBO would ring true.
Instead you are just issuing pro-management propaganda.
Buzdar won decisively and had no reason as a doctor to keep attacking NWBO. He made his point on the one issue he had with them and moved on.
That’s what happened.