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.
Institutional capital will come with changed governance. Personally, I'm a proponent of the platform being part of a larger organization after regulatory approval. There is too much to do, and too much value to create, for one small company.
If you think my view on MAA has changed significantly, you are wrong. If you think I act on behalf of the company, you are wrong.
Agreed, "intentional signaling" is nonsense.
Referring to completely different subjects. Things that are important, but I don't want to get out in front of my skis.
I spoke with the Guggenheim analyst a few days ago.
As you imply, OTLK has submitted their first regulatory filing where NW is obviously about to. Valuations of both stocks reflect a lot of skepticism around approval.
The Guggenheim analyst's read is that investors place a low probability on OTLK's BLA approval. But he and I take the opposite view.
It's hard to get good valuations in bear markets ... people get worn out and find it hard to see the positives.
I was (intentionally) vague with my song reference but I meant May. The filings have to be prefect and, sometimes, getting the last 1% right takes an inordinate amount of time...so it could even be June. They are working on it and it's going to happen.
There are other initiatives that I think are interesting, but I'd like to see those develop further before I make them a material part of my assessment.
nicely done Dude
or May flowers
But still trying to interpret my dreams. Don't want to lead anyone astray.
Not ready to say anything yet but I keep having dreams where April Showers is playing in the background. Probably should ask a psychologist what it all means.
Agree w/ Flipper. MHRA approval will cause significant reassessment and revaluation.
Is that the bear case now?
before: NW will never get regulatory approvals.
now: Okay, maybe they'll get regulatory approvals, but UK doesn't count.
Regulatory approvals are correlated. The receipt of any regulatory approval should change one's view of the others. Use Bayes' rule
Definitely CDEL would have to reveal the customer. Spoofing is illegal and the SEC will step in. So, there's no hiding. Most of us remember the 2010 S&P500 flash crash. They arrested the trader.
As far as partially responsibility. I haven't kept up with regulations of electronic trading safeguards, so I don't know.
I made no prior comment on spoofing, as far as I recall.
As we all know, recently there is a concern that spoofing drove the stock down at different key moment, especially May 10. Historically, there’s been talk of illegal shorting.
I’ve never liked manipulation explanations, shorting, spoofing. I suppose these things take place to some degree, but I’ve always done fine just focusing on fundamentals.
Recently, I’ve put a little more credence into the possibility that spoofing occurred and it had a material negative impact on shareholders. I expected May 10 trading to be volatile, but it was worse than expected. We did not sell a single share as the stock fell from $1.50+ to $0.50-. The other major holders of the stock (or warrants) that I know did not either.
While the data announced that day can be debated, versus prior expectations, the data were positive. Of course, some longs sold; it was just too tempting. Yet, the selling had a panic tone to it. The setup was perfect for a spoofing strategy.
The lead attorney is credible, and they have the trading records. Spoofing is proven from trading records, not from who wrote what article. The defendant attorneys haven’t made the arguments I would expect if no spoofing occurred. One argument made – that they were just executing electronic (spoofing) orders for their client – I’m sympathetic to. I do a lot of electronic trading and I don't know what guards the software has that would identify spoofing. But, of course, if this claim is true, CDEL is just saying these were customer orders and the customer committed the spoofing.
So, I’ve given more credibility to the spoofing claim as I’ve seen things fold. It’s still not my favorite bull argument but they may a shot at a settlement, which will help minimize dilution.
If they succeed, I’ll hire my own attorney as I would have pretty good odds at a judgment in the tens of millions.
Others and I have been telling them it's time to ramp up the communication detail. Shareholders in general need to hear guidance from the company, instead of just secondhand sources (like me).
There's always a fear of lawsuits but they have to be become institutionally investable. This is one priority for that.
I think we'll get one this month.
yes, the Class C shares have been sold at only a small discount to market and with no warrants.
Yes, I prefer fixed priced equity financing over convertible debt or other structures where the holder has optionality.
Debt could be okay, since it has limited upside and close to equity downside. But I doubt the company would be offered that.
I've expressed this to management. They tell me the use of proceeds (Sawston expansion mostly) is so compelling that NW will make the spread. If their forecasts are accurate, they're probably right.
BUT what really matter are the major milestones we're all waiting for.
Mr. PM. I know this type of structure well. Many years ago, I used similar structures on occasion, but no longer.
You're right. The returns are high. I haven't calculated it specifically (some of the bells and whistles are straightforward but one really needs Monte Carlo to characterize the volatility associated with a stock repayment) but it's probably in the low twenties. The holder can still lose money if things get really bad but is protected if things are just sort of bad.
However, issuing stock also has an expected return of course. If one believes the bull thesis it is even higher than low twenties.
But I still don't like the structure. The company should issue securities to those willing to make fundamental bets.
I took issue with conflicts many years ago. I've never defended those. I've never defended missed timelines.
I have other concerns, and I've voiced those too. As recently as yesterday, I was on the phone asking for justification of a management decision.
Yet, I'm hold a big position. Everything must be considered, and we make our judgements. No investment is perfect.
What is strange to me is many who don't like NW, don't like anything and everything. They hated it at $0.14 (my best entry), they hate it now. Some things never change.
I agree with Flipper here
I agree the MIA is the next important milestone.
My comment re Specials was not supposed to imply anything w.r.t. MIA. It was just some numbers that I scribbled on the corner of a page during a conversation.
I don't think they are they are dragging their feet.
We all know timely completion of milestone is challenging for NW. But they will get done, in my view.
I would even say some things are very close. I'm sure I'll be bombarded with people asking me the definition of "close", "things", and "very"
I thought the same thing, but they want to be low key for now.
Also, I should caveat my earlier comment noting that GBP 150k may not be the price of everyone. There's pricing discretion. But directionally I think it positive.
You've never seen comment from me on this topic before. I can't take responsibility for what others say.
Extremely. I'm the one who tells them "Curb Your Enthusiasm"
Well, we are in March so, yes, some in 1Q and also continued progress over the year as Sawston expands.
no worries
I think the Specials program is
generating material revenue for NW and expanding Sawston will not only increase that opportunity but make a rapid commercial launch possible.
Just a few calcs on possible revenue from Specials:
20 patients/mo * GBP 150k * 12 mo/yr = GBP 36M/yr
50 patients/mo * GBP 150k * 12 mo/yr = GBP 90M/yr
yes, the manufacturer/importer licence.
very close < coming soon
True, but I think we're very close to approval.
The JAMA publication changes things. I doubt it was possible before that.
This has been my base case for a while. If you years back in my posts, I've said as much. Good data and regulatory approval have been what mattered to me.
Yes, I've seen it happen a number of times. The purchase will often be made directly from the company and the purchase agreement may require the company use commercial best efforts to list their stock. The credibility that comes from the institution provides a lift which makes a reverse split -- if necessary -- not problematic.
A typical structure is an investment into a pref by the institution, which converts into common upon listing or the passage of time.
All I was saying was the commercial manufacturing license and the UK application can be close apart. The UK regulatory decision will be some months later, of course.
I don't know timing for a buyout. I am confident of significant strategic value given (a) regulatory approval, (b) the ability to manufacture truly personalized therapies at scale, (c) the likely synergies with other major oncology commercial products.
The strategic value is large enough that I don't need an imminent buyout to be okay with my investment. I've had many buyouts in my portfolio, but they often come later but at higher values than many others expect.
and yet we seem positioned very differently.
I don't see that happening that quickly. An uplist will follow either (a) a UK approval or (b) an investment by a name brand institutional investor.
Internally, they are very optimistic. I often take the devil's advocate position with them, but I've discovered they are true believers.
yes, still expecting it in 1Q