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.
Thanks CP that was not my intention of PPHM and management knowing. Sorry if it came out that way.
All this is true but if these chain of events happened that led to a reduction of shares 37M and BP owning 50% and offering a high premium ($200 x 18M or 4B)on the remaining shares not triggering poison pill and having the backing of remaining shares for a deal then what would happen? Would share holders refuse or take the deal?
Quote
BP that created a series of events with Peregrine (knowing it may lead to a rs before such deal is completed) and even though a rs would secure such a BP control of 50% of Peregrine...etc...etc
That was my point but without the conspiracy part from PPHM/management (knowing and withholding information) especially if intentions were/are to acquire PPHM after along accumulation campaign forcing an eventual R/S by depressing the PPS and creating a more attractive buyout offer to the acquirers BODs.
Yes, was researching types of licensing deals and this is 2015 but not a subscriber.
Correct a lot further along and biomarkers intact could be looking at a nice deal.
Here is Novartis deal for pre clinical
while a deal signed at the end of March by Novartis could be worth up to $750 million for the preclinical stage biotech company Aduro Pharmaceuticals. That deal, which provides Novartis access to Aduro's research on cancer immunotherapies targeting the STING protein complex, is also notable for the largest upfront payment ($200 million) for any discovery-stage licensing deal signed in
Here are some licensing deals early stage
With more than half of these deals focused on preclinical assets or technology platforms, emphasis during Q1 has been on early-stage collaborations, with a further four licensing agreements tied to products in Phase I development.
https://www.firstwordpharma.com/node/1275104
Your 2 cents are worth a lot more, nice connection
PPHM value will only be increasing.
Stay tuned
Meantime BP racing for 1st place
Last CC ... no, no, no and now a silence "Quiet Period"?
A company should not give information to one inquirer which it would not give to another, nor should it reveal information it would not willingly give or has not given to the press for publication. Thus, for companies to give advance earnings, dividend, stock split, merger, or tender information to analysts, whether representing an institution, brokerage house, investment advisor, large shareholder, or anyone else, would clearly violate Exchange policy. On the other hand, it should not withhold information in which analysts or other members of the investment public have a warrantable interest.
If during the course of a discussion with analysts substantive material not previously published is disclosed, that material should be simultaneously released to the public. The various security analysts societies usually have a regular procedure to be followed where formal presentations are made. The company should follow these same precautions when dealing with groups of industry analysts in small or closed meetings.
Are we waiting on news and therefore CC questions were avoided?
Sorry I respectfully disagree, I see a bright future for PPHM and share holders.
Depends on type of deal, potential partner might be interested only on drug side down the line and buyout, while PPHM continues with manufacturing.
Don't know just speculation and everything should be considered IMO.
Mergers and Acquisitions
A company may announce a reverse stock split in order to carry out a merger WITH or acquisition of another company. A company's articles of incorporation limit the number of shares the company can issue; a common practice of company buyouts is to issue new shares of the acquiring (or new) company to the shareholders of the company being acquired or merged out of existence. If the buyout or merger means the company would break that limit, it may carry out a reverse split to reduce the number of shares it has on the market. An example of this was Duke Energy announcing a one-for-three reverse split for its 2012 merger with Progress Energy. The reverse split allowed Duke to keep within its legal limit of 2 billion shares outstanding.
So, a R/S with a potential partner and down the line a potential buyout can also have shares exchanged as part of the deal.
If they partnered with a BP and with cash/deal, I would be ok with it. Like I said a R/S could be part of a deal.
And who's to say a R/S isn't part of a deal? Potential partner might want the float reduced especially if they control a substantial amount now. Could play into a buyout scenario down the line with no manipulation while in control.
They have had plenty of time to R/S but haven't yet... let's see what comes out of this "Quiet Period"
The illusion is to portray PPHM as dead and management as useless and that we are worth only $.30 a share. Is this a way to take away our shares?
Stay tuned
To move a substantial amount of shares into strong hands without SEC filing, under the radar would take a long time. And right now it is in a death grip. Most negotiations can take a long time also.
Closing deals is often a protracted process that can consume as much as 18 months, and the average duration of deals between biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies is 3–4 years, offering plenty of opportunity for dissent and quarreling. Long-term negotiations put an even greater strain on relations between the companies, and finding the most suitable partner becomes even more pertinent.
Warehousing accomplishes several things. First, it allows a potential acquirer to take advantage of short-term dips in the target's share price (in other words, it buys shares when they're "on sale"). Second, it avoids having to buy big blocks of shares in one fell swoop, which can make the stock price spike and reveal the company's real intentions. Accordingly, warehousing allows a company to fly "under the radar" for a time. However, the SEC does require anyone who exceeds a 5% ownership threshold to file a form 13G or 13D, which means the size of the company's position will eventually become public and trackable by others.
Stock parking is an illegal measure by which a broker arranges to sell shares to another party to reduce their position for disclosure deadlines, with the understanding that the the original broker will purchase the shares back later at a profit to their receiving broker. Brokerages try to park stocks to keep their holdings legal under SEC guidelines during disclosure periods, or to appear as though they have fulfilled all of their obligations by the settlement date for a particular trade.
Parking is a method a corporate raider uses when he/she wishes to conceal his/her intent to acquire a company. The raider therefore enlists another's help in doing so by asking him/her to hold or finance a certain amount of stock.
2. Transferring stock positions to another party so that true ownership of the stock will be hidden. For example, an investor involved in the takeover of a company may park securities of the company with other investors so that the management of the target company will not know the extent of the investor's stock ownership. Parking for this purpose is generally illegal.
So question is, who is behind the scenes manipulating the stock price and why? Control? Partnership? Buyout? Leverage?
Illusion
: something that looks or seems different from what it is : something that is false or not real but that seems to be true or real
: an incorrect idea : an idea that is based on something that is not true
That is what this current stock price is... illusion ... something that is false but seems to be true.
Once enough shares are in strong hands then the illusion will be lifted and the lid cracked wide open.
We don't want a deal just because we want a deal that can be bad and disadvantage to PPHM and shareholders (hindrance). We need a deal that is (helpful) advantageous to PPHM and shareholders and not give away the IP that in a previous article 3-combo I/O treatments will lead the sector. http://pharmaphorum.com/views-and-analysis/immuno-oncology-keep-ahead-fast-moving-field/
A partnership can make or break a company imo
In summary, finding the right deal partner and pampering the relationship are two of the key ingredients in successful deal making. Only when these two pieces of the puzzle are firmly in place can companies realize the advantages that, in today's competitive environment, are crucial to their well-being and survival.
And who is to say they haven't been in long term negotiations?
Closing deals is often a protracted process that can consume as much as 18 months, and the average duration of deals between biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies is 3–4 years, offering plenty of opportunity for dissent and quarreling. Long-term negotiations put an even greater strain on relations between the companies, and finding the most suitable partner becomes even more pertinent.
Thanks North appreciate it, I'm trying. I also appreciate all posts from longs and DD.
Who is to say BP or potential partners have not approached PPHM/management? The right deal is important and a successful long term partnership is crucial.
See article:
Ex.. good deal
whereas biotechnology partners depend on the short-term revenues—and longer-term royalties—provided by their pharmaceutical partners to stay in business. The difference between a mediocre deal and a great deal can be huge, both in terms of revenue and for a company's stock price. For example, news that Curagen (New Haven, CT) had entered into a drug development alliance with Bayer (Leverkusen, Germany) sent Curagen's shares up 35% to around $36 (Nat. Biotechnol. 19, 186, 2001).
Bad deal:
However, biotechnology companies are often dependent financially on the outcome of one or two deals, and an unsuccessfully concluded partnership can threaten their very survival. Take the case of Amylin Pharmaceuticals (San Diego, CA): In early 1998, Johnson & Johnson (J&J) informed Amylin that it had decided to discontinue development of Amylin's treatment for diabetes, Symlin (pramlintide). Even though J&J had already invested around $175 million in the programme, this unexpected termination meant that the small biotechnology partner had to slash its workforce from 300 to 36 people, and drastically reduce the spending on its development pipeline. Yet Symlin turned out to have some potential
So what really makes the difference between a successful deal and a failure? Which characteristics transform licensing contracts into long-lasting, mutually beneficial partnerships? There are five crucial steps to a successful partnership, including developing a deal strategy, improving bargaining power, and negotiating the terms of the deal. Here, we focus on the two steps most frequently neglected: finding the right partner and post-deal governance.
http://www.nature.com/bioent/2003/030101/full/nbt0601supp_BE21.html
I disagree, if anything PPHM will be in the best position to negotiate now and BP is desperate in this fast changing I/O race.
“Now we are entering the combination era, I believe this is going to be a long slog rather than a sprint. Trying to work out which combinations work best is going to be complicated by evolving standards of care. I think we are going to see more cautious investment, and a return to stronger proof of concept hurdles.”
Biomarkers, tissue samples and specialised lab capabilities
In order to stratify trial patients, companies will have to invest in creating a biomarker plan, with all the related requirements to collect tissue samples and have them analysed in specialise laboratories.
http://pharmaphorum.com/views-and-analysis/immuno-oncology-keep-ahead-fast-moving-field/
That's interesting because BP keeps paying top Dollar to companies like PPHM, matter of fact BP depends on small biotech companies to survive.
" The big companies generally wait for proof of concept and then swoop in to either license the technology and/or the drugs stemming from it or to purchase the companies outright."
https://smithonstocks.com/illegal-naked-short-selling-appears-to-lie-at-the-heart-of-an-extensive-stock-manipulation-scheme/
http://m.nasdaq.com/article/biotech-mampa-activity-expected-to-rise-in-2017-latest-reports-on-exelixis-and-vertex-pharmaceuticals-20170127-00541
M&A activity within the Biotech Industry totaled 326 deals worth approximately $91 billion in 2016, compared to $118 billion the year prior, according to Bloomberg. Also the number of M&A deals in the sector in 2016 was the lowest total in six years.
With many large firms having more cash available, giving them plenty of firepower for larger number of in M & A activities in 2017.
Abuse ATM? Or preparing for positive news?
In fact, among strategic and forward-thinking CFOs within and outside of the life sciences industry, the opposite is true. ATMs are a critical component contained in their financing toolboxes. They understand that ATMs allow them to raise capital much more cost-effectively and with greater control compared to other capital raising methods. Because of the “dribble out” nature of ATMs, they would actually be a poor choice for a company in dire need for financing and without near term value generators or milestones. It is not a “financing at any cost” approach for a company that is in desperate need of raising any amount of capital in order to survive.
ATMs are a great tool for companies with a strategic approach to financing. Using an ATM, issuers can cost-effectively raise capital while maintaining flexibility in the timing an pricing of the offering. ATMs can also be positioned in advance of an upcoming liquidity event or MAJOR milestone and take advantage of above average
liquidity and a rising stock price that can occur with POSITIVE NEWS. Therefore, ATMs are best considered as an option for a company with a strategic and forward-looking approach rather than for a company in financial distress.
http://brinsonpatrick.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/BP-Five-ATM-Misunderstandings.pdf
The PPS is where it is because it is forced down and held down but doesn't reflect the true value of the company, even CEO mentioned that company undervalued. The ATM max limit is 1.5 yrs until cash flow positive from AVID or partnership(s) with money/deal will end ATM sooner and advance drug side. Read earlier CCs, management has stated wants to partner hence the collaborations with BPs and MSK, NCCN etc. now possible test kit partnership.
It is interesting that "someone" is trying to push the MC below 75M to cutoff ATM as that is a regulation. Is there a battle behind the scenes? A force to make a deal?
ATM: An issuer is “primary eligible” to use Form S-3 to offer securities on its own behalf for cash on an unlimited basis in at-the-market offerings if either the aggregate market value of its voting and non-voting common equity held by nonaffiliates, or “public float,” is at least $75 million, or
the issuer has issued (as of a date within 60 days prior to the filing of the shelf registration statement) at least $1 billion in non-convertible securities, other than common equity, in primary offerings for cash, not exchange, registered under the Securities Act, over the prior three years;
the issuer has outstanding (as of a date within 60 days prior to the filing of the shelf registration statement) at least $750 million of non-convertible securities, other than common equity, issued in primary offerings for cash, not exchange, registered under the Securities Act;
the issuer is a wholly owned subsidiary of a “Well-Known Seasoned Issuer” (as defined in Rule 405 (17 C.F.R. § 230.405) under the Securities Act, but generally, an issuer with a worldwide market capitalization held by nonaffiliates of $700 million or more) (WKSI); or
the issuer is a majority-owned operating partnership of a real estate investment trust that qualifies as a WKSI.
Generally, most issuers attain the status of being primary eligible by having $75 million or more in public float.
- See more at: https://www.lexisnexis.com/lexis-practice-advisor/the-journal/b/lpa/archive/2016/03/11/understanding-at-the-market-offerings.aspx#sthash.pCZCNgH7.dpuf
They can't cut off supply of money as long as there is ATM and AVID growth will make them cash flow positive in 16-18months.
ATM: Requirements. In order for publicly-traded companies to raise money through an ATM, they must have a shelf registration statement filed with securities regulators, Donaldson said. They must also have a public float of at least $75 million. That’s not feasible for companies of all sizes. “There are a lot of small companies that just can’t do that,” Donaldson said.
http://medcitynews.com/2011/08/at-the-market-offering-for-biotech-funding-review-4-quick-perspectives/
Strategic CFOs in the life science industry are increasingly employing ATMs because they enable companies to better control the financing process and their relatively low cost compared to more traditional follow-on financing vehicles. Despite this growth, some life science issuers might be missing out because of misunderstandings of what ATMs provide and how they work.
http://www.genengnews.com/gen-articles/dispelling-atm-offering-myths/4161
I believe CP has posted about ATM and that it's not being abused.
He certainly can afford it, worth 6.6Billion estimated in 2013 and manages over 5B
From his offices in the Cayman Islands, he manages a $5 billion fortune, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, including about $700 million in at least 10 bio-tech companies,
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2015-11-09/billionaire-dart-reinvents-himself-as-cayman-islands-land-baron?client=safari
Ken also invests in biotech. He bought 8.5% of CVT, shortly before they were bought out in a nasty bidding war between Astellas and Gilead culminating in the March 12th 2009 buyout for $1.4 billion.
http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/who-is-kenneth-b-dart-and-why/388891
The accumulation is not to "kill" the stock or bankrupt the company. MoneyMakers - Make Money on the down and upside. PPHM has been under accumulation for a very long time with no real catalyst to move it up and with SunRise set back was just another opportunity to finish a long campaign of controlling the float (possibly by warehousing and parking) method under the radar while keeping the PPS down not to bring attention to institutions or retailers. IMO retailers are the ones that catch on first as statics show that individual trading has been increasing over time. The price is being held down to shake out weak hands (psychological warfare) see psychology of trading. Many longs are aware and are adding knowing this shouldn't be under $1 based on AVID growth alone. While others are doubting and see no future.
The reason to accumulate a substantial amount of shares is because the tide will turn and PPHM will start a very very long bullish campaign (IMO towards becoming a BP). (If not bought out at a high premium) but yet we are constantly told PPHM is dead and management is criminal.
MMs if they are controlling a substantial amount of shares will start a campaign of selling over time at a higher price as buyers will start paying more realizing the true value. The Psychology is then reversed but buyers will pay more and more. This is were MMs will make many multiples and retail longs that hold their shares will reap the rewards.
IMO I see multiple partnerships, licensing of platform and manufacturing growth.
Silence right now can be a "quiet period." Short interest has decreased and the lid will crack open.
Let the BPs fight for 1st place
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/54fed56be4b0b8a1d3d33918/t/55afbf3de4b04aec442b8c26/1437581117769/MoneyShow-RomanBogomazov-March17%2C+2015-Final.pdf
https://stockcharts.com/articles/wyckoff/2015/06/accumulation-phase-absorbing-stock-like-a-sponge.html
All IMO as a long.
Agree and we are talking big money/revenues on the test kits alone. I'm thinking we could see another partnership on the drug side and add AVID growth. Things can change very quickly for PPHM :)
Early detection is key...
In studies of women at average risk of ovarian cancer, using TVUS and CA-125 for screening led to more testing and sometimes more surgeries, but did not lower the number of deaths caused by ovarian cancer. For that reason, no major medical or professional organization recommends the routine use of TVUS or the CA-125 blood test to screen for ovarian cancer.
CA-125 is a protein in the blood. In many women with ovarian cancer, levels of CA-125 are high. This test can be useful as a tumor marker to help guide treatment in women known to have ovarian cancer, because a high level often goes down if treatment is working.
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/ovarian-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/detection.html
ABSTRACT
There are no suitable screening modalities for ovarian carcinomas (OC) and repeated imaging and CA-125 levels are often needed to triage equivocal ovarian masses. Definitive diagnosis of malignancy, however, can only be established by histologic confirmation. Thus, the ability to detect OC at early stages is low, and most cases are diagnosed as advanced disease. Since tumor cells expose phosphatidylserine (PS) on their plasma membrane, we predicted that tumors might secrete PS-positive exosomes into the bloodstream that could be a surrogate biomarker for cancer. To address this, we developed a highly stringent ELISA that detects picogram quantities of PS in patient plasma. Blinded plasma from 34 suspect ovarian cancer patients and 10 healthy subjects were analyzed for the presence of PS-expressing vesicles. The nonparametric Wilcoxon rank sum test showed the malignant group had significantly higher PS values than the benign group (median 0.237 vs. -0.027, p=0.0001) and the malignant and benign groups had significantly higher PS values than the healthy group (median 0.237 vs -0.158, p<0.0001 and -0.027 vs -0.158, p=0.0002, respectively). ROC analysis of the predictive accuracy of PS-expressing exosomes/vesicles in predicting malignant against normal, benign against normal and malignant against benign revealed AUCs of 1.0, 0.95 and 0.911, respectively. This study provides proof-of-concept data that supports the high diagnostic power of PS detection in the blood of women with suspect ovarian malignancies.
http://www.impactjournals.com/oncotarget/index.php?journal=oncotarget&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=14795&path%5B%5D=47251
Won't run? Or not allowed to run YET? The question is, who is holding a death grip on the PPS and why?
Psychological tactics being used?
https://www.stocktrader.com/2009/05/14/trading-psychology-stages-investor-emotions/
Why has short interest dropped so much? Why not increase if this was dead? Why naked short(illegal)to create phantom shares and keep a lid on the price?
Could it be smart money is loading up on the cheap/artificial price while making it seem this company is dead? Causing a hold on the price to shake out retailers?
My outlook now is how high will this go and how many shares can I afford to add... one day many will look back and ask "why didn't I buy or add more"?
Oh the tactics seem to never run out when it comes to manipulation causing doubt and fear.
Much much higher Wook... looking forward to multiple partnerships (test kits, BAVI, licensing) and Manufacturing growth.
In the meantime BPs battling for 1st place continues.
2 types. IPO is one of them
What is a quiet period?
Essentially, there are two kinds of quiet periods for publicly traded companies. The first surrounds a company’s initial public offering (IPO) and is heavily regulated by the SEC, while the second is more loosely defined, and refers to the period of time in which a company limits its interaction with investors and analysts immediately preceding or following the quarter-end, but before results are actually released.
http://westwickepartners.com/2014/06/commonly-asked-questions-about-quiet-periods/
Can they be in a Quiet period?
Was walked down from $.31 at start of year to $.28. Now walking back up. Agree nice and steady base and readying for a big move IMO.
That's if the cover see fail to deliver
Short interest has dropped dramatically but naked (illegal) or loop hole continues? I believe it's to keep the lid while shares are still being accumulated. Nevertheless it's illegal practice, if one is betting against the drop of a company they should buy the share short just like one buys long.
"I am sure you here because you are a shareholder in a company that just continues to go down, and you have no idea why. Nothing material has happened but the trading doesn’t make any sense. We hear it all the times. Most CEO’s don’t even understand, and are baffled. The worst part is, good luck getting anyone to listen! There is a major epidemic going on right now with naked short selling right now."
http://nakedshortreport.com/what-is-naked-short-selling
Naked Short — This is an invention of the securities industry that is a license to create counterfeit shares.
http://counterfeitingstock.com/CounterfeitingStock.html
Looks like they have nothing better to do but to insult management, scientists, longs, IBM-Watson and any other type of connection to PPHM.