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.
please point to where you get this "four days" limit--I've searched and asked here before. it seems to be fabricated.
can someone point me to an SEC statement on mandatory disclosure of negative trial results? there's been mention on this board that the company must report negative results within 3-4 days of receipt, but what determines positive vs negative--primary endpoint SS? seems there's a spectrum, but mandatory disclosure is binary. any help would be appreciated.
does anyone know where I can find FDA's statement on mandatory release of negative clinical trial data?
wow, JRIII hedging against failure? never thought I'd see it. I know you love your own logic, but it doesn't make you right.
It seems there are two prevailing theories for the delay, both of which stem from calls with DI but are quite different:
A. They haven't PRed a delay since the update/TLD is just a few days away, and no sense in doing PRs a few days apart.
(post 313618)
B. Delays per interactions with the gov/FDA--perhaps discussing the SAP or BLA and response time is longer per COVID.
(posts 313304, 313310, 313410)
Option A implies TLD (or at least DL) early next week, B could mean weeks or months if they're trying to get full buy-in from the FDA on SAP before unblinding...?
did you not watch the presentation? here, go to 1:15 http://my.fit.edu/~bsubrahm/LPTalk_09122020.mp4
hm, wonder why they recorded so long beforehand knowing a lot could change. I called him out for not believing COVID was a big deal and he stopped responding after that lol. and I only have 300,000 shares which I assume is low / middle of the pack. I'll take your word on it.
Also, even if it was prerecorded, they still chose to let it air... still seems too deceitful to an ABTA conference. It'd be pretty easy to just record another session a few days before that doesn't stress "September TLD," no?
damn. DI never responds to me anymore lol--do you have a more specific date that it was recorded, and did DI tell you that directly?
agreed, except this doesn't jive with Linda announcing at ABTA (on 9/12) that TLD will be revealed "later this month of September." By 9/12, she would have known that the September timeline was off, but chose to tell those at the American Brain Tumor Association that they'd announce results by the end of Sept. Giving legalese to investors to gain wiggle room is one thing, but knowingly giving a false date (lying) to ABTA attendees seems too far even for NWBO management. I might be alone here, but I think we'll hear more than just an update this Tuesday/Wednesday.
While it's very possible management would willingly string us along, I just don't see Linda purposefully giving a false date to those at the ABTA conference (she said, twice, "later this month of September" just two weeks ago)--my guess is that the 9/23 Les "interview" was taped in early September or even August by the clowns, but was wondering if anyone could notice anything in the videos to make that definitive (or at least, that the 9/8 and 9/23 Les clips were indeed taped at the same day).
big biz show questions:
1. Why was Les allowed to go on this clown show / what was there to gain?
2. Were these two videos filmed on the same date ("aired" 9/8 and 9/23)?
- https://www.biztvclub.com/tv/The-Big-Biz-Show/video/a00308b17e89ae098b47db087fb9e4d4
- https://www.biztvclub.com/tv/The-Big-Biz-Show/video/6a63a72571be4a60f2ed7d4b91dcdcd8
Posters have noted they're wearing the same clothes, but they wear those outfits a lot (also seen in this July video: https://www.biztvclub.com/tv/The-Big-Biz-Show/video/3fdc1b94c2f914241ec3c063d752793d)
If they were both filmed on 9/8 or before, then Les' mention of TLD a couple weeks away on 9/23 would be no cause for concern. This could be Big Biz's fault (likely) for not realizing the impact this could have by uploading at a later date from the taping. If it was taped on 9/23 and Les is saying a couple weeks from then, that's a clear can kick... Management / Dave Innes needs to clear this up in my opinion, since the issue arises from putting Les on this whack show to begin with.
scotty, what's your interpretation of this: https://fintel.io/ss/us/nwbo ?
what's this then? https://fintel.io/ss/us/nwbo
1,000 abstracts accepted to SNO... any info on what percentage of these are presented at the plenary session? Trying to figure out if it is indeed something to get excited about, or not much out of the ordinary.
https://www.soc-neuro-onc.org/WEB/Events/Annual_Conference/WEB/Annual_Conference/Copy_of_Annual_Meeting.aspx?hkey=f396fe42-41bf-43c0-8798-c6574b1aa659
i think doubling SOC would be great, but what’s your point? my opinion is irrelevant
it’s not a question for my eyes, but the FDA’s—and i have no idea their answer
the data from a 13 year long trial will be valuable to the field even if it’s not stat sig, i think it’s a far reach to say that quote suggests positive data...
I agree with you except for the part about giving herself more time / mentioning September—she’s proven time and again that she is completely fine saying a date and missing it (the most recent example of missing “late May” by three months)...
what is it that makes you think they already had the data (unblinded, back from statisticians) before ABTA, rather than anticipating getting it back from statisticians this upcoming week or so?
makes a world of a difference
tough to hear right before we're expecting data (i know it's a bit old, but first i've seen):
thanks, but I see her "talk" is during the lunch break, and she's just a sponsor (might not talk at all), no?
where's the info on this Linda talk tomorrow? do we expect anything (data lock announcement) or will she just talk about random stuff again?
just curious why you hope so much that Les has not seen the unblinded data?
typo in second sentence, how does someone not proofread their own article... that being said, any positive attention is excellent right now
So no proof vs no proof, conjecture vs conjecture... at least my argument is falsifiable
that was the first one after 66 events not the one JRIII was alluding to after 88 events
Kevin Duffy--has anyone been able to get through to him? Anyone have a contact number / email? Finding out his take on things / why he left could be critical
November 15, 2028
I called them today about this--the deal doesn't go into effect until Q4 this year, and even then the broker I spoke to said he doesn't anticipate any changes to etrade. We'll see.
We're still adapting the SAP to comments from RAs, and this iterative process could go on ad infinitum with these small raises. Is there any catalyst to coerce top line release, or reason to show TLD before the SAP and RA environment are "perfect"? If not, we could be in the same position a year from now.
IF unblinded data is decent, what do you think the chances are we go through the full FDA approval process which could take well over a year, or we get bought out during that time?
What do we know / predict about DCVax-L's hazard ratio? How does it compare to AVEO's tivozanib that was knocked by the FDA for having a high HR?
why would they need a dilutive financing right now? they have plenty of cash
that's for the week, it's a weekly chart
so are we not presenting at ASCO this year?
if you're unsure of the efficacy of the vaccine's processes, what do you think accounts for the positive data?
what makes you think 1% of the vaccine isn't enough? if I discovered 99% of my vaccine is destroyed at entry, i'd just load up 100x to get the correct dose delivered...