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.
There are several analyst recommendations out there although I can't say how serious they are. Looking at the SRNE page on YF you can see 4-5 analyst recommendations with an average target price of $25. Also, it shows negative EPS in each of the last 4 quarters with a consensus EPS estimate of $5.75 for the fourth quarter.
Don't know where they're getting these numbers from. They may not be serious but they are seriously weird.
I've seen some of these Zack's forecasts before... there was one covering SRNE 3rd quarter earnings predicting $4.96 per share a few months back:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sorrento-therapeutics-srne-gains-lags-224510857.html
I think they have an algorithm that averages analyst expectations from some source and spits this articles out automatically. They don't even seem to do proofreading for believability.
The hiring of David Corsaut was announced in October... does this new agreement dated Dec 29 represent a change to his contract?
The case for INO's vaccine candidate continues to strengthen...
I don't think we will get below 70 cents ever again. I sold a chunk at $1.45, anticipating there would be a drop, and have bought them back now. The stock will still bounce around a little but will shoot up with a couple of announcements about partnerships and the start of construction.
Investors seem pretty confident in the potential of this company so I don't think they are too concerned about revenues in early 2022 vs revenues in late 2021... once construction begins we are off to the races.
This isn't a typical pump and dump because they aren't issuing a bunch of shares. In fact, one of the reasons for the volatility in their stock is that their float is so small. I think some big players are accumulating shares and, of course, there are traders buying and selling along the way that bring in the big swings.
They have a pretty solid staff (brought over two key software guys from D-Wave when D-Wave shut down their software development to focus on the Quantum hardware) and have some key advisors from finance, biotech, software security, etc. on their board. They got a big boost back in August when this Investorplace article appeared in YF:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/7-quantum-computing-stocks-buy-130034404.html
They've talked about uplisting for the past 6 months and I expect to see some big contracts in the near future. I believe this is the real deal.
I don't think anyone here really knows how they'll deploy the technology... they could license it or they could bring it to market themselves.
Since they've always been more of a research company, bringing the UBand to market themselves will force them to grow much larger and deal with a lot of new corporate activities that they haven't dealt with in the past. Hence, I have a theory that it makes more sense for them to license the technology to a company which has the infrastructure to market/support a medical device. Companies which might be interested in the UBand technology include Dexcom, Abbott Labs, Apply (iWatch), Google (Fitbit), and now Amazon (Halo fitness tracker).
It's frustrating to realize that this is essentially the same post from November (predicting news for Dec/Jan), October, September, August, and July. All these potential catalysts have been there but SRNE doesn't seem able to deliver on any of them. For example, we've been awaiting FDA approval for COVI-TRACK and COVI-TRACE for 4-5 months.
Dr. Ji "warned" the shorts about their imminent demise more than 4 months ago - they laughed and are still laughing.
Per Ron's update earlier this month, the various projects (Mayo, Particle, UBand) have been slowed down by COVID. Now that front-line workers are being vaccinated, I expect we'll start to see updates over the next month and then we're off to the races.
The warrant exercise is a clear indicator of management's confidence. You probably should have loaded the boat when KNWN bottomed out around $1.20 instead of waiting for it to break $1.
Like many on this board, I've been long since they started development of the UBand and have been frustrated with the slow progress. But I believe 2021 will be the turning point we've waited for.
I think the Columbia test came out in June so it's only been about 6 months... still too long for an FDA EUA application that was "in the next few weeks".
I don't know why you're busting chops about Laker's information which came from Ben Matone... we've been told "just a few weeks" by Kim for the last 5 months.
You should be busting on Kim for his galactically stupid decisions and promises with regard to the P1 peer review.
INO will have to have reviewed their P3 protocols with the FDA before they start the trial and the trial will need to be approved. Alot of drug trials run with smaller samples and are able to show that their endpoint objectives are met with sufficient statistical significance.
I think it was overkill that PFE and MRNA went out with samples in the 10's of thousands and they probably did this intentionally because of the urgency of bringing out a vaccine... it would have been disastrous to complete P3 and not have a large enough sample to show statistical significance in their endpoint objectives.
One of the few advantages of INO being late to the party is that they can use the experience from the PFE and MRNA trials to determine what sample size is sufficient to prove out their endpoint objectives.
Here's a great graphic that should provide a little humor for frustrated investors waiting the "few weeks" for the PR P1 paper...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Inovio/comments/kf2hym/it_belongs_in_a_museum_kimdiana_joe/
Nurse faints on live TV after receiving the PFE vaccine... this will instill confidence.
This is perfectly fine. https://t.co/dUfl2UxN1N
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) December 18, 2020
And I was responding to your claim that big money was "flocking" to INO. There is 38% institutional ownership and the change over the last quarter is less than 1%. If big money was "flocking" we'd see much higher numbers in both and our share price would be higher than $7.05.
Like most SRNE investors, I'm anxious for them to show some traction.
An explanation of the polyethylene glycol issue associated with the mRNA vaccines - from the YF/INO board... INO might still be in the game if we see enough allergic reactions from the mRNA vaccines.
----------------------------------------------------------
No worries longs we know that we have the best DNA technology and that's why we invest. And is it's starting to show now that mRNA technology isn't so great. Frontline workers in Alaska had serve allergic reactions which required overnight hospital. Wow. The real problem as we know is that mRNA is encased in the lipids and these lipids are coated with PEG. Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is the most commonly used polymer in clinical practice. The methoxy form of PEG, usually used for conjugation applications, has a single hydroxyl group that can be coupled with several entities, including small drugs, proteins, polymers and lipids. Consequently, pegylation results in stealth shielding and increased circulation times. In particular, the stealth effect is due to the formation of a dense hydrophilic barrier of PEG. This breaks down once inside the body and can expose the lipids and this may cause the toxicity or allergic reaction that you are now seeing. I expect more and more of these events especially if you do not get good coverage by the PEGs. This will impact all mRNA vaccines. Let's see who's right.
I don't know that I'd describe the current price ($7.05) as "big money is flocking to it".
I own shares in the company and seriously want to understand their FDA approval strategy and Mark Brunswick seems to be their goto guy... do you know why they don't seem to be getting any traction with the FDA?
I don't understand Mark Brunswick's role in the company. He was in the FDA for a number of years and is supposed to lead their regulatory interface with the FDA but so far we hear NADA from the FDA. Is he just not very good at his job or maybe he made enemies at the FDA during his time there.
Anyone know the story here?
See today's interview with Doug Cole on Proactive Investors... good things seem to be happening.
I believe the biggest lapse in credibility came with the statements back in the summer regarding COVI-TRACK and COVI-TRACE. For example, Henry Ji announced COVI-TRACE on July 29 and said "they plan to submit the test for FDA approval within the next few weeks." Here we are almost 5 months later with zero news about COVI-TRACE and FDA approval.
Investors will quit believing press releases when companies fail to deliver on their timelines. The only PR's we see are in reference to new acquisitions - what good are the new acquisitions if you can't deliver products to the market in a timely fashion. Even worse, investors will begin to worry that this company is spread "a mile wide and an inch deep", working on so many different thinks without being able to execute on just one of them.
There's only about 10M shares outstanding for this stock... I can't imagine it being bought for less than $500M which would translate to ~$50/share.
It's an old article - doesn't mention Regeneron's antibody cocktail which now has EUA from the FDA and it seems to feature Remdesevir which currently has questionable benefit.
They didn't apply for it... another mistake by Kim & Co.
I can't imagine %'s being left out of a peer reviewed paper. In fact I expect the numeric details to be so dense so as to be nonintelligible to a non-scientist.
Kim has certainly made alot of mistakes in the INO-4800 development and approval process and INO certainly has a credibility issue. However, I think that INO-4800 will be a strong performer and the P1 results will bear that out.
The reason I believe this is that INO-4700 performs well and had long-term endurance for MERS and given that MERS is also a Coronavirus, I think that INO-4800 will also perform well against COVID-19.
In addition, I'm sure that DOD has seen the P1 results and wouldn't fund them unless they were reasonably strong. Moreover, why spend so much effort lining up manufacturing partners if you know that approval is unlikely.
I think the P1 delay was mismanagement on their side - I don't think Kim was prepared for the pressure of competing with BP in a pandemic.
Fact Checking... the beginning of a massive campaign to cajole people to take the vaccine. And we all know how trustworthy and unbiased fact checkers are.
I agree that the deaths are probably a non-issue for the first round of vaccines, but people in the trials have experienced some unpleasant side effects that are being downplayed. Also, there are still some potentially serious issues with this vaccine when rushing a rollout to billions:
1) No one knows the long-term efficacy at this point... when will we need a booster or second round of vaccines
2) The use of polyethelene glycol in the vaccine could cause serious issues, especially when it's time for vaccine boosters... "The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination"
3) mRNA vaccines have never been used before and no one knows what long-term autoimmune issues are going to be triggered
Interesting. I wonder if they realized that a device on the ear would be too apparent - like a flashing sign signaling the person is diabetic.
Interesting device. I'm not sure how popular it would be... I think alot of folks would be reluctant to wear the earring device as shown in the article. Also, the device apparently uses RF for detection and KNWN owns the patents for this technology in the US.
Once again, KNWN needs to get the UBand out there because they have alot of competitors nipping at their heels.
37C is the same as 98.6F... traditional body temperature. I think that would be an acceptable definition for "room temperature" which is what INO has claimed for INO-4800.
Agreed... without substantive news the sp will continue to drop.
Hopefully they come out with some kind of update on UBand, Mayo, or Particle in the next couple of weeks.
The FDA has acknowledged 2 deaths associated with adverse effects from the PFE vaccine along with a number of other life-threatening adverse effects. As often noted in this forum, there's concern about possible side effects from mRNA vaccines and this may open the door for INO's approval to get accelerated...
https://healthandmoneynews.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/breaking-fda-announces-2-deaths-of-pfizer-vaccine-trial-participants-from-serious-adverse-events/
I've come to believe that selling the UBand technology to big pharma partner is a better strategy for KNWN than rolling out the UBand themselves. A story like this illustrates the risks associated with medical devices and the fact that a company needs to be big enough to manage that risk also absorb losses associated with it.
That being said, I think the UBand is probably safer and more risk tolerant than alot of the other CGM devices out there.
Agreed... it's surprising that the FDA is still asking questions about the Cellectra device. Makes you wonder if they are deliberately slow walking the INO-4800 approval. INO probably should have gotten a BP partner when they started out - that would have guaranteed more respect from the FDA.
Not sure how seriously EMA will take this warning. It could impact COVID vaccine EUA's, especially the PFE vaccine which uses polyethylene glycol.
https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/ex-pfizer-exec-demands-eu-halt-covid-19-vaccine-studies-over-indefinite-infertility-and