Replies to post #204129 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Jeff4iam4]

IFU, i think you miss his point. Apples paradigm shift occurred way back in the early computer days. Our paradigm shift is just now occurring. The medical community is just now starting to see there is a better way....it took a while because medical science is much more difficult than computers....especially when lives and health of people have to be considered when trying new drugs and treatments. Safety is a concern that causes significant delays, one of the many things computers didn't have to deal with.

[thealias2002]

No disrespect intended to you personally, but it baffles me how people always fail to account for (or complain about) 'funds acquisition' in budding bio companies, I.E. Product-less entities that can't support critical R&D.

It's RARE that it works otherwise in this sector. They could not fund operations and product development without dilution, in most cases, and reverse splits are a byproduct/consequence of that.

Do we have to like it? No. Yet, it should not be the least bit surprising.

[snackpack]

IFU, your numbers are wrong

you're suggesting Apple produced a 160 fold return since 2005 which is incorrect. Look at a chart which shows split adjusted prices. If you bought at $10ish in 2005 it was split adjusted so you would compare the return to todays $117ish price. Round it off and you get about a 12 fold increase not 160.

So a $100,000 investment in 2005 would be worth about 1.2 million today, very nice for sure, but not the 16 million you suggested.

Additionally, the post you replied to was NOT comparing prices of the two companies. It was comparing the coming paradigm shift in oncology to that of the PC and Apples meteoric rise because of that shift.

Regards