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.
My concern related to the patents relates to Leo prioritizing paying himself over the years with zero revenue, costly trials (tens of millions of $ at minimum), no meaningful partnerships or interest from anyone of influence, and these ridiculously absurd 'forward-looking statements' with 'analysis' of 'blue sky' markets for things like OM etc, that require a P3+ to do something with; lacking BP interest. It's just nonsensical. That's 'lifestyle company' behaviour.
This has been going on for what... 15yrs almost now? And how many indications have approvals? That's my point. We're only at P2 for a handful of things, not enough cash to run a meaningful P3 for any of them, and no partners. If its taken this long to get here, with a P3 requiring around 2yrs to completion and possibly hundreds of millions of $, I don't see this happening w/o a M&A, license etc. Hence the concern about the patents expiring. Time is money, and Leo has no concept of time. Cash will be gone/Shareholder value will be zero if the current development timeline doesn't change.
Anything could happen, yes... but so far not much has happened.
Let's see how COVID plays out and hope he doesn't fumble the EUA application etc.
Concerns about the 'uplisting', 'lease mismanagement' etc are relevant concerns from the past that hopefully won't reflect how this transpires. If so, I think we're doomed.
I'm hoping LW is involved with any/all 'negotiations'.
I don't adore these CYDY comparo's honestly. They're a legitimate company in the BioPharm space. They have actual staff, development capabilities, a legit mgmnt team, cash etc.
IPIX is more like 'LeoPharma'. Run out of his house in Boca with a virtual office, and he's paying on some patents.
IF positive P2, then we have no idea what happens. M&A, partnership etc. Leo's 62 and paying himself almost $700K/yr by destroying long term shareholder 'value' in the company thanks to toxic financing. Great work if you can get it, but with lifespans for patents set to expire likely before any sort of approvals could be realized given current development timelines and available financing for trials, there's likely only a handful of possible scenarios to be considered here...
IMO anti-viral is the last gasp here for the long-sinking ship that's been this company for 5+ yrs.
Pending positive outcome, I'd be looking for a merger of sorts, if not a license for an anti-viral indication of some nature..
I'm not sure I'd consider Aspire selling shares as 'MM Manipulation'...?
To what are you referring, besides the plummeting share price?
I'd take $5/S all day long right now and run for the hills and NEVER look back.
Leo isn't 'forced' to do anything.
He could've chosen to finance the company through a variety of options.
He could also partner or license if there was interest.
None of this has anything to do with the 'MM's controlling' anything. They are irrespective of each other.
You're living in fantasy land if you think there's a 'criminal MM interest' in this company, along with everyone else on this board that believes-so.
People who don't understand how things work believe in conspiracy theories. Plain and simple.
So this is all about the MM's and nothing to do with the financing mechanism of choice for the company?
OS from Jan 2020:
Jan 2020- OS 214M ~
30 Apr 2-2- OS 267,408,840
31 May 2020 OS- 296,688,311
30 June 2020 OS- 328,317,492
14 Sept 2020 OS- 343,579,992
16 nov 2020 OS- 355,957,332
30 Nov 2020 OS- 357,616,780
31 Dec 2020 OS- 367,984,689
31 Jan 2021 OS- 390,861,713
10 Feb 2021 OS -418,069,575
Couldn't have a thing to do with some simple math, eh?
This was published 9 Feb 2021.
Not sure why Leo just got around to mentioning it now?
Sort of like the trials that have supposedly been running (since Dec 17, 2020) in Russia?
None of this makes sense timeline wise.
And why do you think the PR of the Peer Review will somehow suddenly 'unlock many things', that it hasn't 'unlocked' since its release a month ago?
Not sure how relevant, but this was interesting to read.
https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2018/9/phase-3-trial-costs-estimated-at-19m-study-finds
Pardon... was I paying you to research this?
I've seen you chide others for failing to do their own DD.
Funny how those who can't take advice always insist on giving it...
I was on limited time and happened upon the update on Google Scholar.
Simply plugging 'Brilacidin' into Google Scholar and confining the search to '2021' yielded the preview. An 'hour of your time' shouldn't've been necessary in the least... Calm down.
The updates are typically 'previewed' by MetaData populated from the articles/reviews/listings themselves, so I posted here to enquire further; not having a subscription to Springer's subscription-articles.
No attitude required. There's plenty to go around these parts already, and I've tried to be fairly careful to not bring mine into the mix, despite others incurring my distinct ire.
You're better than that. I've come to expect more.
You have my attention, regardless.
Not sure what's so 'cute' about that.
I was posting to see if someone on here had access to the doc related to the post so I could see the reference in its entirety.
Not sure what the condescension is all about. It's not appreciated.
This is all that's available:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_ylo=2021&q=brilacidin+&btnG=
Many thanks for the request!
Curious to see what's going on with Sonis!
Funny, I could've used a heads-up on this 5-year dip...!
it was an excerpt from Google Scholar that was quoted.
That's why I wanted to access the doc for more info, but I don't have a subscription.
OM update? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11864-021-00823-6
Does anyone have a subscription with Springer?
Here too: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33595722/
But the Springer pub is the host.
Something about 'Enrollment is expected to be completed in Q1 of 2021...'
...am I crazy, or does this seem a little greedy, given the salary, existing share count for him, etc? I understand the hedge, but...
What's his total ownership now? I seem to have missed it in the breakdown somewhere...
SBFM is pre-clinical and just recently initiated SARS CoV-2 testing in a mouse-model at the U of G. Seems like quite a ways-away before an FDA 'OK' to even initiate a P1? Nothing in humans. IPIX is in humans and awaiting results of an ongoing P2 for COVID with numerous P1's and P2's run to-date for this compound.
COVID is just a single indication of several that are P3 ready for one of their molecules.
Not sure I see how you're comparing the two from a value-basis?
The IPIX updates from the last year might be worth a read for you?
This was the most recent one that seems to be the cause of some confusion around the board: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793220007184/ipix_ex101.htm
The confusion seems to stem from 'Kips Bay' causing a 13G filing: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001845716/000121390021008496/ea135337-sc13gkipsbay_inn.htm
This is practically identical to the series of MFO filings related to Leviston Resources, which I believe you to be familiar with.
Which supersedes this updated Aspire agreement: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793220004521/ipix_ex101.htm
To which some posters are opining Kips Bay being of unrelated business, which I'm questioning as Leviston was compelled into a 13G filing following their conversions of warrants/preferreds to common once they held >5% the 13G went into effect (several times).
My feeling is this is what transpired with Kips Bay, (as-yet unnamed by IPIX) as the most recent filer benefiting IPIX +$3M (+$2M)
(Original filing 9 Dec 2020) : https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793220007184/ipix_8k.htm
Initial Terms: Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.
Read this carefully:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000121390020017195/ea124065-13gleviston_innova.htm
This is the Leviston 13G filing.
What type of shares do you see them referencing?
Are you familiar with how Preferred are converted?
Leviston and Kips Bay are not the same, nor am I saying they are.
My point is the same John Miller was the signatory for both the Leviston agreement and the Kips Bay agreement.
Different agreements, different legal entities, but very similar deal structure with IPIX.
DEF not saying anything of the sort related to KipsBay or Leviston 'transferring shares' or whatever else you're insinuating.
Different agreements. Similar structure.
No way Kips Bay suddenly just 'purchased' 20M shares on the open market, with the SP staying effectively locked in place the way it did during the timeframe in question.
Are you saying that Kips Bay is yet a different entity than whomever Leo entered into an 'emergency' $3M deal with to supersede the preexisting Aspire deal?
My assertion is: there's no way.
Yes, we will see in the Q.
This is why I keep saying: This is non-standard and we should've got an 8k/PR because this is a 'Material Event' by definition. People on this board are living in fantasy land if they don't think that having the OS diluted by 30% from a single $3M deal is 'material' to their investment.
Leviston's deal structure was almost identical. Not sure what you're referring to with respect to 'only common stock reported' for the Kips deal.
From the 13G filing, the common is referenced, yes... because that's what happens when you convert from preferred. You end up with common, and thus the filing is compelled. 20,978,229 shares of Common Stock Class A
Simple and general math related to the $3M closing if converted would yield at a VWAP of an average of $.18 = 16.66M shares. This is a gross oversimplification, but fairly easy to see where the ~20M shares came from knowing the dollar amount of original closing. (warrant-conversion rates etc, notwithstanding)
I'm sure OG/LR will chime in with specifics if they're not exhausted from doing this already over the last week.
Again, from this S.P.A dated 9 Dec 2020:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793220007184/ipix_ex101.htm
p.7
John Miller signing both the Kips Bay S.P.A as well as the Leviston agreement is a coincidence then?
Similar amounts in shares.
Leviston: 29 June 2020 16,665,734 shares. 13G filed.
Signed by: By: /s/ J. Miller
Name: J. Miller
Date: July 10, 2020
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000121390020017195/ea124065-13gleviston_innova.htm
Never said a word about 'Moscow'. Literally not-one-mention of anything specific. Check my posts.
That was something mentioned by others. Never by me.
My issue with the company relates to zero transparency and my 5-yr hold-down and Leo being a shady MF.
Last time I checked, this board was open to posters to post their mind... My opinions are my own.
No.
Haven't run into him in literally years.
My understanding is that they do not
It's about the trial protocol, endpoints and bio-markers.
Interesting read here:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=6aea13811d-briefing-dy-20210216&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-6aea13811d-46110006
'The coronavirus is here to stay' — here’s what that means
'A Nature survey shows many scientists expect the virus that causes COVID-19 to become endemic, but it could pose less danger over time.'
Maybe to finance his house in Mexico?
I have no idea... I've been saying this since it happened. This is a colossal red-flag, and we got NO PR about what I've considered to be a VERY material event. To give shareholders a 30% dilution-based haircut in the blink of an eye, with a pre-existing financial agreement in place with Aspire... ?
None of that feels right. But nobody on this board wants to address it.
Perhaps the SEC/FBI would like to address it for us?
We went over this last week...
And I'm guessing that LR / OG will chime in at some point to give more specific details since I don't remember the specific conversation rates... but if memory serves, based on VWAP and current share price, I think it can be up to 150M shares spun out of the second closing.
Details here: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1355250/000147793220007184/ipix_ex101.htm
KMBJN!
Many thanks for the response and the breakdown. Greatly appreciated.
The post you were responding to was actually the 2nd I think after my frustration peaked when nobody would respond directly/intelligently to the first, with the complete charting-set posted... so I figured limited-attention-spans of the board were possibly dominant.
I heard back from an OWS virologist connection who walked me through the data-set yesterday. Interesting stuff for sure, and he had some insightful conclusions related to the anti-inflam properties and many of the other 'anti-virals' he's seen through their lab.
What seems like the most interesting consideration is time-of-administration. With rising viral titer loads in patients, if not mitigated, it seems incredibly important to administer (anti-viral) dosing ASAP when patients hit the ED/ER. His thoughts related to the first 2-3 days being most-critical, and beyond that, the immune-response seems to become the wildcard that requires anti-inflam interventions. I guess this is why Dex is the go-to for severe cases? There was an additional question concerning pre-screening to check the progression of COVID in the patients, he was hoping to see included in the trial protocol.
There was also mention of the concern that it should be SOC to screen for viral titer loads to determine the most appropriate course-of-treatment upon admission. That seemed super logical to me, and I marvelled that it might not be implemented currently?
I guess we'll just have to wait to learn more since the whole trial-situation is a complete mystery with this company for some reason.
I'm familiar with Phillip.
And I'm aware he works with a 'Kyle'.
Based on what keeps showing up in IPIX's other 'business' related findings (the PrePrint etc), the Kyle West(on) guy seems to be the only logical connection of a 'Kyle' with IPIX... (and with Philip). Unless Philip is working with a different Kyle that's also working with IPIX...
Viewing 'page info' on IPIX's site and PR's, the author is almost always a 'Philip Drake'.
@ROIResearch has posted about this numerous times in the past month or so.. .
What doesn't make sense to me is: Why is a guy with a sports&Rec mgmt 'background', involved with high-level RBL research protocol concerning a drug looking to target a SARS CoV-2 pandemic indication?
additionally... this is part of Leo's contractor-group:
http://drake-west.com/
Philip Drake and Kyle West(on)
Thank you.
Not 'focused on just 1 chart'... as I mentioned, I was looking for an explanation.
I had a conversation earlier today with a virologist-friend at another RBL and got the breakdown. I appreciate you running through your thoughts as well.
The bottom-line? Nobody knows how this goes until it gets into humans. Period. He said it. John Carrol from Endpoints said it... Fauci said it... everyone I know in the medical community keeps saying it: Until you get it into humans, none of this means much. This is also why we're below the radar I think...
Not having anything posted on CT.gov doesn't help things (a sentiment shared with medical-professional friends connected with the FDA, PE guys etc).
Not sure why Leo feels like keeping this 'top-secret' helps anything? Is it because he's concerned about the 'unknown' of results?
Some public knowledge would be better than none I feel...
Appreciate the time you took to go through this Farrell.
* https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210214/SARS-CoV-2s-resistance-to-remdesivir-in-vitro.aspx *
Sounds like in Moderate-to-Severe the anti-viral component is less critical (to completely insignificant) than the anti-inflam/immunomodulatory response.
(this was from a virologist friend with whom I just spoke).
This is apparently why Rems isn't used in this cohort and why Dex is and is highly effective.
It's apparently all about the immune response and inflammation.
The Defense Production Act would cover manufacturing domestically I think...
Distro-wise, there are any number of entities to be contracted that could manage logistics.
...but first... the Trial.
Nobody cares if the drug doesn't work..
This is my concern, and what I've been worrying about since the PeerReview came out:
In a word, yes.
https://www.vekluryhcp.com/?gclid=CjwKCAiAsaOBBhA4EiwAo0_AnBqd6k5UxJs4I1AqSPcn7JFXxgl_mBL2_4kwUjedPe2A8uRHmLuZHBoCutQQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
https://cmr.asm.org/content/34/1/e00162-20#:~:text=Remdesivir%2DTP%20acts%20as%20the,HBV%20(31%E2%80%9334).
Are you going to believe Leo's pumping-PR's or the Peer Review that was actually proofed by professionals?
Show me where in the Pre Print + Peer Review, where the identical claim is made, and give me the example please. I'd love for this to be proven differently.
This isn't akin to proving 'god' exists.. this is science and these lab results are verifiable.
Look at this chart. I keep posting this and the only one responding to and sharing the concern is OG. Look at Viral Titer loads for both Rems and Bril for yourself.