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.
"Wouldn’t be surprised if they ditch the partnership after the CV19 blunder."
I see no reason for them not to give this a whirl. It's a huge market, slowly filling up with effective, but relatively dangerous and often expensive immunologics. And Alfasigma is heavily involved with IBD.
I did post it. At least once, probably twice. Could have been part of longer notes to the board that you missed. I asked, what was happening with the study, had it started, etc. And that was what I was told. Then click. I had no idea who I talked to or who she was. But she was at the line. And yes, that was the answer to my questions, that covid issues were strong in Northern Italy. I have some distant relatives I got tagged up with on Facebook who are in Northern Italy, and they've mentioned the lockdowns and related issues, too. And no, I never asked about IPIX.
"Alfasigma still waiting on more B supply to start a trial? Had to be the biggest BS excuse ever...."
Could be, who knows? But, as I posted more than a few months ago, when I called one of the company numbers in the US, I got a staff person who said something to the effect, "We have had lots of covid in the northern part of Italy, it made everything more difficult and late." I took it for what it was worth, logical, but not definitive anything. Then she was gone....
"meanwhile vaccines may be a long term health hazard:"
Absolutely, F'n nuts.
Yessss.
By the way, what's your guess at the first pps driver of the New Year (assuming we have one). Mine is Alfasigma, around mid year with a successful Ph2b. If strong enough, they could be buyers of the whole IPIX IBD franchise (I may be hoping here more than expecting.); or maybe they just wait to finish the 3 before they decide what, if anything, they will do.
As time passes I seem to get more disturbed at the shell company we own, no office, no staff and no lab, no post docs, etc. Imagine what lab testing re Brilicadin for MRSA could turn up (or not). Just an enema and IV so far, both useful, but of limited treatment perspective in the longer term (i.e no pills, injections, etc.). But I can't minimize the spit and swish for OM, just what it should be, ideally, for an inexpensive, effective place in a hospital formulary, if it ever gets funded for a Ph3.
"The virus' skill in delaying our immune response, but not stopping it altogether, may explain why the immune system roars to life in the overreaction that kills many COVID-19 patients. That deadly overreaction is known as a cytokine storm."
Very similar to the sepsis response to serious bacterial infections which are addressed by huge, wide scoped, anti-biotic pushes. A true Hail Mary shot that often works to save a life but sometimes doesn't. Carville might say, "It's the immune response, stupid."
"What a disappointment to be sitting where we are! Dang"
Yep. My post got dissolved last week, could have been my bad hands. It said something like in the last weeks---
pps .053 volume 3 million or so
pps .057 volume about 1.5 million
pps .052 volume at 225,000
Hmmm, no pps action, no manipulation, no collusion, no nothing. The MMs are firmly in charge and this is what they want the pps to be. After all they set the price, they can use models as they like.
I've mentioned it before, analysis is most often done with statpacs. Not a big deal. Or a lengthy process. Was it you that mentioned Leo has not withheld good data.
Zeposia marks the potential and the draw back of Brilacidin for IBD conditions. For example, Zeposia, this powerful, dangerous and effective immunologic medicine for MS and IBD-Ulcerative Colitis is available in pill form. And look at what it costs (well over $100K/annually):
https://www.zeposia.com/multiple-sclerosis/cost
The list price for the ZEPOSIA Starter Kit (the initial 37-day supply) is $9,110 · For a 30-day supply of ZEPOSIA (regular daily dosage).
Brilacidin is still an enema for IBD, not an injection, not an inhalant, not a pill or anything else, just an IV. These treatment options need to be studied, perhaps none are really available, but we'll never know until they are addressed in the lab. Time marches on.
But they are in vitro tests.
"Probably for years.."
I'm somewhat more optimistic. Alfasigma can get underway in early 2022 and get through the Ph2b shortly thereafter. Unless it runs its testing for a year as one of the BPs has done in IBD. Leo could pull a coup and get some licensing for B for MRSA (the standard IPIX IV limitation would be no limitation here). Or B for OM, how much do you trust Leo on this one? Maybe an anti-viral use of B could pop up strong from the ongoing invitro studies. Or Leo/company could just continue to burn over a million annually on salaries. Of course comment might just be right.
"Should he be criticized for what he's GONNA do?"
Nope, but for what he hasn't done.
"Normally such facilities would be found two or three floors below ground in a very secure location in the middle of a Big Pharma campus."
Actually, high levels labs can be on the top floors of large buildings, secure buildings, but away from large population movements. With secure entry, secure parking lots, a laminar air flow floor, and related items. The BL 3 Lab in Chicago is such a facility. I've been there. But I don't want to get into a discourse on high level Bio facilities, your knowledge appears much deeper than mine, but mine is not "zero." And yes, the FDA rules are complex dealing with any pharma related research, especially that related to the use of animals. See for example, below, addressing FDA research rules. But folks take such course, and they are relatively inexpensive. This is what some postdocs do. And I'd love to see a couple of these bright, young folks working for IPIX.
https://about.citiprogram.org/course/iacuc-protocol-review/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIy-DXxfnr9AIVuQiICR10KQ2rEAAYBCAAEgI8FvD_BwE
And of course I am not suggesting large scale animal research, for what purpose? But a small lab to do invitro research, to explore if there are useful and practical alternatives to IV administration and even to address the small scale use of animal research if that appears warranted, though that may be "farmed out" just as easily. I don't know how these would shake out, but I do know that the fact that IPIX has none of this has severely limited the development of potential products in areas of high need and high value for investors. Finally, we can be assured that a near BP company, like Alfasigma, has all of what I am addressing. If this works out to the benefit of the IPIX longs.
I've always felt it is unfair to criticize Leo purely with the benefit of hindsight. FWIW, I've always (at least for 4 years) felt IPIX needed a small staff at a real address, adjacent to a small lab that is run by a couple of post docs, has provisions for small animal research and routine lab support for invitro and chemical/biological analysis. For this, just addressing Leo's salary, he could have continued working as a CPA so that his draw could be in the 2-300,000 range for himself and any other paid staff, leaving the rest to support the office/lab. $500-600,000 does not make you "rich" but enables a good, affluent lifestyle in Florida, for example. He chose not to work and live off the company dilution. We all saw it, no it doubt made some of us uncomfortable, but it was, after all, his brains that secured some products that had a decent chance to be transformational.
"I’m gone (loss or not) if IPIX files to increase outstanding shares. Increasing outstanding shares would tell me another preferred is coming at sub $0.10/share which would lead to massive dilution"
This is a frustrating place, but I'm hoping that knowledgeable posters (you and others) stick it out as there is still some potential value here amidst the mistakes and foolish choices by management (I know, "management" maybe a poor choice of words). GLT, either way.
I think this was just posted, i.e. the Lucent2 Ph3 study. Good stuff for BP but still lots left in the approximately 44B market, as noted. We need to see what Alfasigma does, and I see no reason they would not try and claim a piece of this pie and, if successful a piece of IPIX, as they have the right of first refusal re an IPIX purchase/licensing. It is an IV treatment, not an enema, which does make it more tolerable that what AF is using. This all calls for some fast footwork by Leo, who I feel is smart, knows a bargain when he sees one, but does lack judgment as a little bp shell company leader, imo.
Yep, the 44b market has the BPs grabbing big pieces. IPIX? Notice this was a one year long, IV study. I'd like to see the AEs.
I'm following the compassionate use threads, as most of us here are, but I do wonder why the concern? After all, compassionate use is by IV, usually after patients are really sick or soon getting there, and subject to the same issues that caused the failure of the B test for covid. It would be a lot different if we were dealing with compassionate use of an injection, even a pill, with the complexities that implies, an inhalant or some other method of treatment that could address patients earlier in the course of covid, before they are in a hospital bed with an IV line already run. Leo chose to leave the IV treatment mode as the main treatment mode, having no lab to develop alternatives nor money allocated to other labs to develop alternatives; we are left with trying to make good coffee with coffee grounds (just addressing B for covid, but the analogy extends further, I am afraid). There are remaining anti-viral, IBD, OM and even anti-biotic avenues of potential success, though some have declined in potential with recent competition, for future success, but hoping for compassionate use options just does not seem like a good thing to spend time wishing for. I left off kevetrin as a future option as I have no idea or hunch about what the future may bring. Does anyone here?
I am remined by our boards Wise Poster that level 2 is not part of the Ihub, basic fee.
Farrell, yesterday I ran across an article (I forgot where) about a great jock who got a hospital based MRSA infection. Lost both legs and an arm in amputation. Am I wrong to recall lots of speculation a few years ago that B might have some potential there, I recall it was part of the speculation related to B for ABSSSI. At least here just an IV would be no hinderance. If you had a patient with MRSA wouldn't you be looking for options, and not finding many, maybe not any?
Great stuff. Do you recall Ignatius something (Iggie) from the old yahoo board. He was big on Level 2. It's part of your 9/10 dollar monthly fee, if you are not a freebie in IHub, I think. The MMs feel all the money on the table is theirs and they have the power to almost make it so, at least with little bios. They are part of the tell if we take the time to read them (most of us don't, including me, but smart money does).
Appreciate the response. Some days you get the bird, some days the bird gets you.
Cheer me up, Lemon, often I buy the dip, too. In fact Monday, if we see .05ish, I'll double down a bit more. Not really sure, in a logical sense, why I'm dong this as my expectations for secondary covid findings are very low, my expectations re AS (and IBD in general) have somewhat diminished, my OM expectations remain only modest and my hopes for ABSSSI are mostly gone. Why are you contemplating more doubling down, if you are? Really, I'm asking.
Usually, Fuerstein Ps me off, not sure why. But he did save me dough once. So to that extent I owe him. IMO he was wrong on this 2017 story. Leo took a shot most longs would have taken if they were in charge. We lost, most Ph2/3s fail. But the point is you have to (or at least should) try if the product looks like it has legs. And Leo was right about shorts playing us, has happened more than a few times. Not the determining factor for the pps, for sure, but it has been real on occasion (Rosen, and others, etc.). I am not used to defending Leo, especially since he hasn't answered any question of mine for a few years. All jmo.
"but also because it might have real meaning to some very sick people."
Nice discussion/analysis, lots to ponder, great to wake up to, many thanks. I was more than a bit of a sloth this morning, bunking in late. But good to do sometimes.
Yeah, in the fever to make a few shekels, it is too easy to forget that some good numbers and outcomes, sprinkled here and there, may also help people in need.
Reviewing your thoughtful response again, I remain skeptical, at least until I see some numbers, any numbers would be a good start. Kahneman (in his classic, Thinking, Fast and Slow[) has written about quick, low data, emotionally-based responses as often being surprisingly accurate, but only when there are ample past experiences and data/information in the decision area. That does not appear to be the case very often re IPIX.
"Either way the public is not required to be told. And we know how that is typically handled here"
Fair point. We have never, for example, seen the complete prurisol data. I'm still of the mind that if the data were good, it is shown and the pps rises. What benefit would there be in not showing good, compassionate use data? Unless the data is good, and it has taken all this time to analyze it. I don't believe that. What I do believe is that the data was less than desirable. And if we never know for sure, we have our answer, without the data.
But it is so hard to believe that if good or even decent compassionate use data existed, it would not have been trumpeted quickly and loudly. It was not double blinded, for example. That doesn't mean it doesn't exit. I (we longs) can't verify that either way, but just that significant compassionate use data is almost beyond belief.
Nice analysis. Always useful.
Nice stuff, hope you're right.
"Hopefully it's non-dilutive unlike government spending."
By this I take it you mean government spending somehow diminishes the nation. This actually has lots to do with IPIX financing. For example, government spending on roads, schools, libraries, basic and even applied research, and all, DARPA, travel to outer space, etc., boosts the economy, creates high quality jobs, a cleaner environment and improves the nation. IPIX, on the other hand, does not invest, it dilutes and pays salaries, with little left over for testing and receives little through licensing. It has no lab, little money to even secure enough product for testing, and no research post docs in a small lab (cheap, but smart and highly skilled) to do so many things that would be good for a little bio to do. Austerity is another way of saying shrink the economy (or the staff of the little bio), but too few have ever read Keynes to know how the investment part of an economy even works. Either way, slamming governments spending has got us into the situation of a crumbling national infrastructure, old schools, roads, bridges, levees, lead filled water supplies, dams, etc. No lab for IPIX has gotten us to the point of speculating if Leo paid for animal tests of some his products (never saw it in the budget, but am not sure how it would even be listed). Sorry, trading dilution and salaries for a small lab (just a few post docs, a few animals, test equipment, etc.) is a choice investors have to live with, and one we certainly did not choose. Sorry for the rant.
I'm not arguing your general point, Leo has not been ideal for longs. Just saying you know enough to be more specific in your analysis. GLTY
"Time to pick up your remaining pennies and run for the hills. Todays marketing release from Leo spells the end of IPIX. IPIX will be under one penny next December."
This isn't helpful or based on much of anything.
I don't think Leo would ever step down, away from his (and his associates' salaries and control over hundreds of millions of shares). And there are not enough shares held by the longs, acting in concert, and how hard would this be to attain, to unseat him. We are, as they say, stuck with him. (Admittedly, last time I computed this for myself, and made my own estimates based on little else but guesses, was way over a year ago).
I'd rather see more numbers and less words in any PR, in fact I'd like to see any numbers. I am let down that there was no report on Alfasigma's progress in testing Brilacidin. Like it or not Alfasigma remains the only significant, external validation of an IPIX product. The market, such as it is, apparently has spoken, or rather whispered. I hate appearing so negative, and the PR sounds hopeful, but it is, as noted, still just words.
Daubers, GLTY. Really. Let's hope for better times.
Thanks, livefree, for the thoughtful and candid reply to whose tenets I fully subscribe to, for better or worse. I have too much on the table (at least had too much on the table) to declare it a loss at less than 7 cents. I particularly share your concerns re DeGrado's advice. On the other hand, maybe he let his hopes get a stranglehold on his realistic views and expectations as so many of us did, so often deaf to the growing sound of the tells. Or maybe Leo just disregarded his advice. We'll never know. I just wish I had more faith in Leo's judgement. There is remaining value here, Imo, if it can be unlocked properly and the world's medical needs remain.
'Grifting using a "pipeline" of products that nobody else thought was worth a bucket of warm spit.'
This is too general, imo. Alfasigma felt Brilacidin was worth a tumble, and secured the right of first refusal to purchase all or some of its IBD franchise, as I read it. OM still has a chance, as I see it, as do some anti-viral capacities of Brilacidin for a semblance of a Tamiflu-type drug. Of course this all costs money and needs external support or huge dilution. None is a slam dunk, but none has virtually no chance.
Be nice if this got us a good 5-10 cent pop, but that would be raising my hopes over my expectations (0-1 cent pop).
Great analyses, the logic pops. Probably would have been better if more of us here acted as financers instead of investors (or degenerate gamblers, as the case may be).