It is not a matter of being savvy, it is taking advantage of an opportunity when it is presented. Both ONCS and the investor get a mutual benefit. I will be curious to see who the investor is when it is finally revealed. The important point right now is that they are a very respected/trusted investor. When dealing with small cap bios you need to be fearful of investors who double dip (i.e. get a discount on shares and then use those shares to enable significant shorting with minimal risk). These type of investors have no vested interest in the success of the company and often work behind the scenes to drive a company out of business. That is NOT the case here and if the investor is someone like BBrothers or someone else with name recognition than it will lead to rapid price appreciation.
Just to be clear - this does not guarantee that their will be a partner but it does signal (to me) that negotiations are still ongoing. My belief is that partner's are simply asking for too much. One example might be an exclusivity clause for all cancer indications. ONCS, per the letter, recognizes how important their findings are in relation to non-melanoma indications. They specifically point this out in the letter. If correct it SIGNIFICANTLY increases the value of what they have (think order of magnitude higher). Remember, most valuations of ONCS simply look at melanoma indications (which is why I feel ONCS is VERY undervalued). What do you think the value would be if they are used in a combination treatment regime for many different cancers? To me, this is the difficult part of the negotiation. ONCS can not give this up to simply enable the P2B at a lower cost. Either partners must put in fair value or ONCS goes at it alone to extract the real worth. The funding enables them to do it either way. They highly prefer a partner, but you do not agree to $500M and exclusive rights when the real worth is 20B.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
