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.
ffc: yes, thanks.
ae: excellent. Mods pls consider sticky.
What’s amazing is that Mr Smith claims to be nearly 800 years old.
Soj - if 2.50 not in a “jiffy,” can we say … soon(!)
Nice call Gary. Thanks!
Judge - rising on the cloud to 100 MA means we’re possibly going to the 1.50-1.60 neighborhood?
Fireman - I suspect you are correct.
PM you would have had to provide an address and occupation. What did you report?
senti I believe the announced intention is to PR the “acceptance” of application, a step indicating that all required modules/submissions are complete and in apparent compliance with submission requirements.
mars: Early Time Restricted Feeding? That’s all I found
ATL: on your list how come all on the left have “Dr” in front of their names whereas none on the (very short) right-hand list do?
Sir P hey welcome back. My phone has been running out of consonants because I’ve not been using enough vowels by comparison. I’ll be back in balance now in no time! Who says your posts do not add value to iHub readers!!?? Bah humbug!!
BobLL: Carl Sagan said: “The Absence of Evidence does not mean Evidence of Absence.”
Happy - thanks for your earlier reply. You assert management is poor. If an investor had bought for a quick return, say on data lock, I could agree however imo the blame would be on the investor not management. But I, and I presume you, still own shares. If within the next 6 months, say, the SP goes to something not hugely improbable- $5 - $10, meaning a 2-20 bagger (or better) for most here, would you still criticize the company’s silence as poor management? Simple yes or no.
Seems to me you’re assigning a grade before the test has even been turned in to the teacher. IMO. Best regards
bio congrats for sure. Because I got in somewhat late and did little buying at first I am presently still well in the red. Thinking that the JA and TLD would be relatively soon (“Sept Co mention of TLD within months of data lock” as I recall - if this is slightly inaccurate in specifics that’s bc it was so da*n long ago and I’ve successfully repressed the detail!) I didn’t want to miss a nice jump. And that is the reason I’ve not tried to trade down and up. My acquisition goals were aggressive and my thought then, and now, is that the price difference will not be material in the end. We’ll see…
Thanks ex! Fancy meeting you here!!
Happy: I do not love the (apparent) silent/trust us strategy. However, I do not know that this strategy overall/ultimately was wrong for maximization of share price.
Monday starts a new trading week. You read it here first!!
What periodicals want to publish identical recipes? Makes sense to me!
Happy: about “loopholes.” I get your point and to you and a whole lot of shareholders including ME yes it seems like management is using the (presumed) embargo as a convenient -maybe even flexible - excuse to avoid disclosure. And your further point about how management seems willing to interpret and apply those rules to follow a course of action or silence that we might prefer that they not follow. That’s not grounds for criticism that’s grounds for commendation for skillful course charting in changing conditions.
When I go to my tax lawyer I don’t want
him to follow the most superficial interpretation of the code. I want him to squeeze out every favorable, reasonable provision or interpretation and maybe some that are even marginal as long as I know the balance and make the decision. If otherwise he’s not doing his job. I expect absolutely no less from management assuming (as it appears) that management has determined in their exercise of fiduciary judgment that this is the best course of action for the company.
So, respectfully, I draw the exact opposite conclusion than you do about the careful application of “rules.” Best wishes.
PS my personal tax return w state returns was 187 pages this year. For perspective
Ha jd when you posted this while SP was 1.50 I thought you were FOS. Now I hope you’re right!
Fireman thanks.
Fireman - so each here sell to the other at .02 loss so that’s the wash and they transact elsewhere for the profit and or cover. Easy peasy. Thanks Brother
Fireman - love your posts. Question abt wash trading I see how that can boost interest therefore SP but the implication of your post is that is happening to depress SP for short covering or accumulation of shares to trade. This is what I’ve not understood from any of the last year how do these trading schemes depress SP?
Doc L excellent thanks.
Captain O: is that allowed - using someone else’s infernal mechanical equipment?
Poor Man - I thought the answers to your earlier post were a bit defensive but here I will strongly disagree with your implication that the failure to act proves or even suggests that there is an ulterior negative reason. There are dozens of entirely legitimate reasons for not litigating including prominently that it is expensive and not necessarily productive, not to mention hugely time consuming for any enterprise much less one so small with more important things to accomplish. I recognize the premise of your question goes beyond litigation but what good is going to come from a public debate with a wholly disseminating adversary? Well
meaning posters here cannot resolve far more simple disagreements - do you think if DI posts, “Adam here’s where you’re wrong …” that is going to shut him up? He’s getting paid for this you know.
No the reason nothing appears to have been done is that it would not work but would waste resources. Time will tell if 5/10 and related changes that calculus. Best to All.
Poor- I do not litigate claims of the nature that NWBO might bring. However, it seems to me very unlikely that AF Stat MMs or hedge funds would have the right to discovery of NWBO internal confidential documents even under a Protective Order.
The issues for journalists imo are what information did they have to support their unqualified published public statements. Those journalist statements are the basis of NWBO’s potential claims. You inquire about discovery of possible NWBO info that was not public. Not relevant imo
As to MMs the issues are what evidence can NWBO produce that tends to show
collusion between each other or maybe even journalists. NWBO business, JA, RA documents etc would neither provide a defense to collusion nor illuminate wrongdoing against it.
In addition, I doubt that NWBO information would expose them to potential claims. We may disagree with some strategies but ultimately the “business judgment” rule allows broad discretion. Any discovery granted to these prospective defendants would be under seal to the extent proprietary or confidential information is included and a court is going to give very great deference to NWBO characterizations.
So, the answer is, No
It is not the duty of plaintiff’s counsel to identify and resolve the merits of potential defenses of adverse parties or entities. It’s the adversarial system. If one party thinks it has a meritorious position they present it in court with evidence if they can do that.
Whether AF is named in a lawsuit if filed:
1. He was an active participant
2. He knew his statements on 5/10 about the failure to change the endpoints were false as Bio I think showed a day or two ago
3. There are litigation advantages especially regarding discovery against a named party as compared to a non-party
4. If part of the reason for this possible lawsuit is to get alleged journalists to be more accurate with their factual
statements why would one leave AF out?
5. Does anyone think NWBO management have warm thoughts about Mr F? Or more likely, understandable animus (to put it mildly)?
6. Lawyers aggressively sue all possible responsible parties and persons for very sound reasons
Happy Weekend, All
hope - litigation coming - let me guess - soon? I actually agree with you I hope my post is a joke
DrH - no doubt
DrHigh - you know him personally or are you acquainted only thru the drive-thru?
We’re creeping back into the whole penny neighborhood. On and off. Hey, it’s a start!!
PM Thanks. Best
Soj and Judge - likin’ the RSI. Someone said momentum is your friend until it isn’t. A bit of a non-sequitur but some truth to that I think.
PM a pointed question: would you not have said the same thing a year ago? Just wondering your baseline not poking holes. PS hello to the pigeons.
Yes Judge welcome back
ATL: per your comment, below are the approved Approved PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors
Name Target Approved
Nivolumab PD-1 2014
Pembrolizumab PD-1 2014
Atezolizumab PD-L1 2016
Avelumab PD-L1 2017
Durvalumab PD-L1 2017
Cemiplimab PD-1 2018
Dostarlimab PD-1 2021
The BPs selling the above are the likely bidders for NWBO I suspect.
Horse - upon learning that the commentator who popularized this exclamation, I don’t think it is appropriate here while we are still attacked by shorts who learned from him. Thanks either way have a good one.
ATL this is the 30th reply to your very interesting post - congratulations to us on these reported results and thanks of course!