Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[nuke661]

EyeBuy,

I have to disagree with you on those points. I do believe BPs will not ignore the data for these other trials and will prompt them to continue the deal making process.

BPs are not the ignorant investment community at large. If the screw up was indeed due to a 3rd party screw up and we do actually have a significant number of long term survivals occurring (still find that fact very hard to fake) then I cannot see how a knowledgeable BP would ignore the information from other uncontaminated trials. Doesn't make sense to me that they would ignore positive randomized trial data.

The vast majority of Phase 2 trials are of the type we are using for front line NSCLC and for the pancreatic cancer trial (not to mention all the other IST data just waiting to provide a surprise). Also, IMO, these trials carry much less risk of hidden gotchas like the double blind trials have because a company is not at the mercy of other companies' performance. I guess this also means I don't agree with your statement:

If interim data for 2nd line NSCLC MOS (by all accounts here a very hard data set to screw up)...

IMO, there are significantly more process type traps imbedded in the double blind process that makes it much easier to screw up the performance/application of the double blinded trial than a plain randomized trial, especially from the point of view of the company paying for the trial. The company paying for the trial is the most motivated to see it done properly and, here in the double blind process they have to pass off these duties to 3rd party vendors who IMO aren't anywhere near as motivated in attention to detail.

These randomized trials may not create the level of belief in the efficacy that the double blind trial does but again its rare to use a double blind format at this stage of the game anyway. Lots of companies get great boosts from trial results from these types of randomized trials.

The ATM cannot be turned off until they get another source of funds and if these other trials provide valid data then I see no reason why they won't be granted access to funding.

Nothing yet has come close to proving that the management team was deliberately withholding bad information for an inappropriate amount of time or purposely misleading investors. Don't get me wrong on this subject. I have my doubts on their ability to manage trial processes but I prefer not to go there anymore. The ASM is over and there is no benefit for me to discuss this subject further.

The funding institutions will make their determinations on this subject when the time comes for PPHM to approach them for more funding. If they get another good substantial loan based on trial data then the ATM should again be put on hold and the stock price should benefit positively from this.


Bottom line here is that we are just going to have to disagree on the catalyst potential for the randomized front line and pancreatic trials and what BPs and lending institutions think about Peregrine management's trustworthiness. I believe we only have 2 - 4 months at the most to find out.

Take it easy Eyebuy.