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.
Monroe1 It's quite clear that in your opinion NP can can do no wrong.
However, some longs have positions that suffer 6 figure drops due to market reactions to NPs confusing at best, and often hyperbolic and or misleading statements. When one's salary tops $1M/yr (+ warrants -- how much has his total compensation been YTD?!?!), is it really too high an expectation or requirement for them to speak succinctly, factually, and with credibility?
Spot on! If LL efficacy is as purported by myriad Dr's, CYDY mgt, et al, there is in deed an extraordinary political opportunity!! However, I can't see how that can be advanced by CYDY mgt, nor for that matter, can the company gain much traction in general from NP's woefully bad messaging!
We are all welcome to our respective opinions, but very honest criticism of flagrant mgt blunders, and legitimate concern for how the market will react to such an obvious weakness, is really the diametric opposite of wanting the company to fail! Read the boards! There is no shortage of savvy longs who are concerned about their significant positions. So if for no reason other than wanting to make $ or to loose less $, they are not likely commenting on mgt because they want CYDY to fail - maybe, just maybe, the messages will result in positive change. Whether a long shot or not it's probably better than sitting silent and frustrated while watching your position dwindle.
I couldn't agree more!! The blind faith devotees will blame the bashers and the shorts into eternity, but merits of LL can only carry mgt's incompetence and misrepresentation so far and for so long. I'll be happy and surprised if my position doesn't drop by ~ $100K tomorrow.
You are so right! But it's very hard to forget further demonstration of inept mgt and abysmal messaging!
Sorry, I'm confused!
Where are taxes low in the Southwest, Arizona?
Re Long Term Cap Gains going down: Biden has not only said he is going to raise Cap Gains tax (significantly if I'm not mistaken), he's also said he'e going to do away with the 1031 exchange.(Considering the devastating effect that would have on RE: it would meet serious resistance; therefore it wouldn't happen quickly; and it would probably have to be tiered based on $ thresholds or brackets)
Thus it stands to reason that a person who thinks Biden is going to win may want to exchange real estate while they can, or take some LT gain on shares held for more than a year, before the higher rates are in effect.
So clearly, "have patience, the science will prevail" has to considered in the context of and how that pertains to longs who believe in the magnitude of the sciences’ long term potential, but who also want to take some LT gain this year. They will understandably be less patient and more concerned about the near term effects on the SP, that has been noted by many, to often be related to management (specifically, but not limited to, abysmal messaging).
Thanks Venture Cap! I wish I'd said it so succinctly in my last post!
Recognizing and acknowledging yeoman's effort is not the same as accepting the painful truth that CYDY BOD and Mgmt seems to neither understand nor accept they simply aren't up to the current task.
Back to patience, given the high likelihood of LT cap gain rate increase in the next ~12 months maybe some of the 6 figure longs would like to take some gain (not cash out!) before.
I hadn't thought about that, but I did figure the common good might be better served if the government funded orgs or institutions were more neutral or balanced in their politics. I also wondered if those contributions could have something to do with who might scrutinize potentially wasteful spending a little more closely. Regardless, it seems Fauci's position is pretty clear. Not withstanding any of the above, are the results failing to support the purported strength of the science, or is the SP decline primarily a consequence of the often dismal messaging (as well as questionable strategy at times) that can only result in the apparent erosion of confidence in management?
Seems there was a post about a month ago on yahoo board noting the political contributions from CDC staff and mgt over XX years. I neither copied it, nor vetted the numbers. However, as I recall it was something like 8 to Republicans and > 2000 to Democrats. Even if that's off by an order of magnitude, it would be noteworthy but not surprising .
Great post, makes great sense! And especially "Make sure the scientific write up is PERFECTLY crafted for the world to marvel."
Also, and further to my previous post, on the topic of messaging, would you, as CEO, in the meantime (while waiting for uplist) announce that results should be out in days?
Thank you for your salient point! However, regarding:
Ops, as do many, I appreciate and thank you for your experience and posts.
I'm sure we can all connect with your references to AAPL and the following:
Hard to not wonder what 5X that cost is in actual dollars compared to the loss of your most zealous, experienced, and CREDIBLE advocates! I'm guessing the former absolutely pales compared to the latter!!!
Mmmm, if they are truly that nefarious, can anyone imagine how the discovery period in a class action wrongful death suit would look?!?! Seems there are times when the true merit of a case with marginal merit may be the magnitude and impact of exposure! Could be a 2-fer; also see what networks or outlets don't carry the story about who's being deposed, and about what!
Scooter, sorry about the slang, but clearly this isn't meant to be financial or legal advice! I don't know nuth'n about neither!!
I thought Remdesivir (Rem) was Fauci's answer to Trump's favoring HCQ (the latter based on efficacy results of use outside US?). To Liz, Bernie et al, did Trump push (to point of actually moving bar to suit Rem's results) for establishing Rem as SOC, or was that Fauci? Beyond being the embodiment of BP (not British Petroleum), doesn't GILD's rather dubious reputation support a high likelihood they threatened to contract with the highest bidder and/or guaranteed price? Notwithstanding all the political BS, regardless of left or right, I can't help but wonder what's in all of this for Fauci! Note: Foregoing is meant more to bring up questions, than make allegations.
Nonetheless, assuming results are at least close to what's anticipated or hoped for by me and the majority on board, I'd strongly support using politics in any and all ways, to get the Lero word out!
I didn't hear the statement clearly, and came away less than 100% certain that they were 100% certain. Are those among you who heard it pretty confident there was certainty on CYDY side that no one in HIV trail had contracted Covid? Thanks in advance for reply(s)!
Given how the ambulance chasing class action lawyers surface at every potential opportunity provided by bogus negative press, it's surprising that one or more of their ilk hasn't launched a campaign for a wrongful death class action. Although nothing has been verified, there has been plenty of chatter about the possibility of nefarious activity (including but not limited to stonewalling progress of one treatment, while favoring another/others), and quite possibly by any of the following: Fauci, CDC, FDA, Big Pharm (e.g Gild) et al. Thus, might the class comprised of people who've lost loved ones due to failures of the rather pushed "SOC", have more merit than the other BS allegations used to solicit clients? At a minimum it might get people on all sides of this thinking.
Doesn't WainWhatever have a boat load of warrants from the raise they did?
Wasn't it "medium" pharma?
That was great Bob!!
Isn't Fauci the one who moved the trials bar to suite Remdesivir's results? Or, at a minimum, didn't he label it the SOC ? And was that the med that was favored by the "white house"?
Please forgive me for being naive. Gates wants to make more $, to fund more philanthropy, for more power?
"Expect a huge return. Only if forced by a buy out sell all your shares. If CYDY remains independent, keep some your entire life and put me into you Last Will and Testament."
1) Regarding the former, no concern about significant tax on the cap gains? (+ over 13% if one is lucky enough to live in CA!)
2) Do you fundamentally lack faith in any buyer being able to realize the same or more of the potential than an "independent CYDY"? Therefore, your're generally suggesting you favor reinvesting the net after taxes in something other than Big Pharm (if holding CYDY isn't an option)? Does metering share sales over subsequent tax years, based on fluctuating brackets, neither apply nor fit into your equation?
There's probably a good case for paying taxes on gains before pressures for social and economic justice force tax rates up. However, I'm curious what else drives your position.
Cheers
Assuming there's a link to the Ted talk, will someone please share it? Tks!
Wow, 3 very rational posts in a row!!! I still think the science shouldn't have to bolster the COE. The qualifications, actions, credibility and resulting confidence in the CEO should bolster the science, period!
For those who don't like comments differing from their own: I will never, and have never, given stock advice, nor am I qualified to do so! This is entirely my opinion (from which you may draw your own interpretations or conclusions). Please do not take investment advice from my post or ANY MESSAGE BOARD. Do your OWN DUE DILIGENCE.
@DaveV1, Chuckles759, et al: Check Costco and various other successful corps that have shown long term growth and success. Seems many quite large companies don't pay execs huge salaries...overall packages with incentives/milestones/performance related bonuses make up a major portion of total compensation.
For those who don't like comments or opinions that differ from their own, and may tend to label them as [bad] stock advice: I have never, will never, nor am I qualified, to give stock investment advice! This is entirely my opinion (from which you may draw your own interpretations or conclusions). Please do not take investment advice from my post or ANY MESSAGE BOARD. Do your OWN DUE DILIGENCE.
I think it's equally hard to believe how many people are simply not willing to acknowledge the obvious reality of NP's tainted credibility, particularly when it comes to his speaking/messaging. With all the other potential or existing headwinds, basic common sense should dictate changing one of the few simple things the company controls 100%: change the messenger, promise little, deliver a lot! How can there possibly be anything to lose?! Considering the consensus seems to agree on the "strength of the science", could there even be one serious investor who would react negatively to NP staying away from the podium?
Furthermore, the position by some, that CYDY will succeed, in spite of NP's limited ability to really inspire confidence through his messaging, doesn't really make a lot of business sense. Some revere NP based on giving him credit for the SP increase from $.30 to 3's. However, isn't it totally myopic to focus solely on their OWN experiences and perceptions? What about the perceptions, and resulting confidence levels, of the rest of the market, and more specifically, of the potential new investors?!
Not dis'n NP's efforts and work ethic, not dis'n the science, not dis'n the potential, just looking for voices of reason, during a time when there seem to be few.
"He’s an aggressive kid out of his league in this market. But he’s gotten them this far, I don’t think he can take it much farther".
Considering the accuracy of those comments, how can anyone justify his bump in base pay to a million?!?! Would the optics suck a little less if his salary raise came after he actually delivered the goods? Or, maybe give him some raise, if he stops speaking. In the meantime, what's wrong with stock awards, and other performance based compensation, as is the case with most well run and successful (and SIGNIFICANTLY larger PUBLICLY traded) companies? With all the potential he crows about, why shouldn't his compensation be tied to the actual realization of at least some of it? Is NP weighing his need for the extra $30K or so a month against the potential for negative perception by the market or new investors?
@Chuckels 759 "WHO chief scientist: No evidence that any drug reducing mortality of patients
Apparently he hasn't gotten the Leronlimab memo yet."
Fight politics with politics:
Considering Trump's disdain for WHO (given WHO's handling of Covid and ..., I doubt he's alone!), wouldn't he simply revel in beating them to the Lero MEMO ?!?! I don't think he's much of a Fauci fan either, and if I'm not mistaken , Fauci hasn't exactly been pushing Lero. So Trump's awareness, and resulting mention of a treatment indicating promise (no hype, just fact based quotes from some of the involved physicians), might be a 2-fer (where the hell have WHO & Fauci been?). Maybe it would even be a 3-fer - he sure can't be accused of favoring BP with a message like that.
Perhaps groping here, but no harm no foul!
We'd obviously be hard pressed to find a sane person who'd be against communication! However, albeit subjective, there is a legit case to be made (and no reason why both sides can't be civil about it), regarding the negative impact on credibility and thus confidence, if/when the messenger (particularly so, when the CEO) is both unclear and rather prone to hype. If that concern weren't shared by many, we few would need to re asses our perceptions or positions, or at a minimum, "just let it go". Because you seem among the more experienced and market savvy (certainly more than I) on this board, I value your opinion, and I was surprised at your lack of concern about NP's messaging. Do you think many of us are hypersensitive, or over reactive, to the direct relationship between management credibility and confidence, and moreover, the relationship between the latter and the market?
@ bbaaller42: "With a share price that moved from .30 to 3.00 I see no reason to be critical”. Do you remember when the SP was close to $1.50 a few years ago? Do you recall NP saying (on a CC I think) the projected HIV market would be $120K/patient/year X’s the global # of cases? Whatever the # of cases, given the countries many, (likely a majority) are in, could their treatment possibly average $120K/year? Do you think there would’ve been so many dilutive raises at declining SP’s over the last 2-3 years if NP had been more credible, and therefore more able to inspire confidence?
Again, we can certainly have a civil discussion, or even disagreement, on this subjective topic.
Furthermore, with all the external challenges and headwinds, how can anyone expect serious shareholders to be complacent when management's "style" (code for ineptitude), is sucking the wind out the sails? I doubt anyone is faulting him for being a Rookie, the frustration is a result of the simple fact he's not getting the (NEON) memo that he's in way over his head!
Additionally, the appearance that the BOD seems to be helpless, unaware, or simply complicit, doesn't inspire much confidence either! It's probably not a perfect record, but nearly every time he speaks, the shorts make $.
If NP can't be replaced by a seasoned bio med heavy hitter, why can't he simply leave the speaking to someone else who's more adept and inspires more confidence? That would be a great start!
@ mjbaker84 "Why the .20 drop already ?"
NP spoke!!
Thank you to Grip, Hi Growth 70 (HG70), Mecurio, et al, for having nailed it in recent posts. HG70's comment, and notably the 2nd sentence is perhaps the most concise: "Management's prophesies have really got to stop. Bluster and gravitas do not = execution and success. In better hands, this rocket would have already launched."
Notwithstanding the obvious market savvy and experience of many on this (and other boards), who’ve openly questioned NP’s qualifications, it seems fair, reasonable, and logical to hypothesize the following: The more evident the strength of the science is, the more one has to look at management as responsible for many of the delays and struggles (all, or most of which, have been extremely dilutive).
Being in over one's head doesn’t = a lack of tenacity, determination or work ethic, nor does it = bad person. However, not recognizing it usually points to one or more of the following: obtuse/imperceptive, stubborn, hopelessly ego-driven…!
Furthermore, could there be a worse time (for CYDY) for NP to try to succeed at the exceedingly daunting challenge of regaining lost credibility?!?!
And when numerous committed longs (as many of us are) share the same points or observations, think about the perceptions of potential investors, lenders, or... !
Great point Grip!
Re WSJ article on Sat 5/23. Haven’t checked board for a few days, so please forgive me if this is old news. Has anyone on board seen and/or referred to 5/23 WSJ front page piece on shortage of Remdesivir? Does anyone know what WSJ’s standards/requirements are with respect to printing responses to their articles? Considering the knowledge and writing skills of several people on this board who are also medical professionals, whether a collaborative piece or not, wouldn’t a concise, factual (NON-HYPE), well written reality check piece regarding Lero vs Rem, garner their attention as a printable response, or at minimum catch the eye of WSJ staff)?!? Given that last run-on sentence, I’m 0 for 3 as a candidate for submitting the piece!
Nonetheless, not only does the Rem article beg a factual follow up with info on the alternative with proven safety, and is awaiting approval, I’d think a noteworthy piece on that platform would have to be noticed by more than a few people who could “make a difference”! Certainly many of you on this board have shared the salient info with other media outlets.
If significant quantities of Lero were known to be in the pipe, any reference to that would obviously be noteworthy.
"Like having Gretzky and Hull on the same hockey team will win no matter the coaching staff. The fans and the money will come soon enough."
I really hope you're right!
1) Opining on concerns about NP's limitations (I'm hardly alone on that), doesn't make me negative on CYDY. I have said numerous times, while I remain long, I'm often frustrated and concerned about NP's communication skills and the extent to which he's out of his league.
2) I don't boast about the good investments I've made, whether distant past or more current (if I sold today, CYDY would be among them). My point was to embellish on Highgrowth's comment about the importance of management being up to the task in the League they are playing in. And I punctuated that by my experience based concern regarding how critical management can be.
Amen, Highgrowth!! Considering his experience, I'm surprised Black ops has never referenced management! NP may be a fairly shrewd and determined "street-fighter", but he's out of his league. Can anyone here speak to whether there are board members who have experience in Big Pharm league?
Call me over-critical, or grossly opinionated. However, over the last 10-15yrs I'm nicely into 6 figure losses on companies that had products that COULDN'T FAIL. In at least 4 cases, underwhelming management handily grabbed defeat from the jaws of victory. This often occurs when people who are both smart and determined, aren't quite smart enough to have the self awareness to know their limitations.