Daily observations.
First off, I was wrong in MY OPINION that I didn't think they would raise the AS if they had an ASM this year. That was my own opinion and not a 'Campfire' story. My opinion was purely based on the preferred C-shares and nothing else, which I will talk about below.
In regard to the upcoming ASM, I will vote yes prop 6. I think it is the right thing to do as it is needed at this time. I know several shareholders with a lot more shares than myself and they are all voting to approve the raise in AS. I find it interesting that some of the posters who have been furiously against an R/S have stated they might vote no. That would be guaranteeing that we will see an R/S in the future. The company has even said so much: "the Company needs to either amend the Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares or implement a reverse split of the Common Stock." That could be scare tactics, but those who have read my previous posts, I do not see an R/S as negatively as others when done at the right time. I find it funny we have investors that do not understand the difference between authorized and issued and think the raise is a dilution.
I will also vote yes on the election of directors and likely on the ratification and approval of executive compensation.
In regard to the 500M raise in AS, I think that is a reasonable number. We currently have around a little less that 1.5B shares potentially issued when fully diluted (already issued plus options and warrant liablities). I am not including the 24M potential shares from the sold C-shares, as there's no saying if they would ever be converted. That gives them 200M shares of Common stock that is authorized but not issued. In addition they have the 100M preferred share to play around with, where 10M have been authorized as series C shares. Reviewing the document creating those shares, I saw that they were non-transferable EXCEPT when authorized by the board. I think that in the event of a partnership, they could use the C-shares as the shares to sell to the partner. I think that 10% would be a good percentage of the company for a partner to acquire. That would be just under 8M C-shares. A partner would not have any need to convert those shares to common stock and thus the c-shares would not impede in the 1.7B cap on common stock the company can issue. They would want to keep them as 'preferred' with all the benefits that entail versus common stock. The have the potential, currently, to issue up to 90M additional preferred shares as the articles of incorporation allows for 100M preferred shares in addition to the common stock shares. These could come in handy at a later time.
Personally, I think the ASM announcement is a positive. That is just my opinion. I do not have any idea how the market in general will perceive it. It seems like those fighting against NWBO use every news event to try to move the price lower. I do not know if they will do it this time, but they have proven that they can if they want to. I do think that with the JA out, they are either being careful or there's more support from the market in general. The daily SP is not a concern of mine, so this issue seems irrelevant at this time for me.
I am still not in the camp of a buy out will happen, now or in the near future. The raising of the AS from 1.2B to 1.7B does not in itself preclude it. It would actually be a sign that it was a possibility, due to the fact that after the raise, they will have enough shares to issue which is important in a BO/Merger. BUT the current SP is in my mind a close to 100% guarantee that it won't happen. LP is not selling NWBO at this or anywhere near this level.
I do think that a partnership would still be an option. I have mentioned how I would like to see such a partnership structure and to me that is still the best option. $x upfront. $x for milestones. Maybe $x for x amount of shares (maybe 10% of the company at a price either pre-determined or at a certain date) and a profit sharing for perpetuity (BMY paid NKTR 65% in their setup for exclusive rights for 9 indications). Merck is still my favorite, based on Duffy, the value it can bring to Keytruda and the fact that Keytruda seems to be the checkpoint inhibitor with the best results in most indications. That doesn't exclude others from being in the mix.
I think that at least one thing, if not more, will need to happen before any deal can be announced. We need to get the MIA for Sawston. That is almost a given, as any partner would want to know that commercial production of Murcidencel is in the clear before paying out money for a partnership. I think that could literally happen any day now.
We might also actually have to have the shares available (ASM and a yes vote for raising the AS). If the partner is Merck, they might be waiting for news from the combo trial. I remember that at this time last year, a few posters were hoping for some form of intermediate results. Now that the results of Murcidencel has been announced, it could free up the release of some new about the combo trial. As I am not a scientist, they might have to wait for approval of Murcidencel before they can release any news, but I don't know. I just know that people more involved with the science were hoping for some news last year.
Sorry for the longwinded post. JMHO. I am an easy target to argue with as I am not able to respond. Hope your Thanksgiving was amazing and that we see some positive signs in the near future.
