Replies to post #52131 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[PacificNW]

As bs as the PhaseV magnacarta was it did lead to Malik's downfall which I believe is was goosed NW. But here is my new take on that scenario. What if Wolf new Malik well and if she kept the lawsuit between Macrocode and Cognate to herself like some believe then when she joined Ondra in summer of 2015 she may have bad mouthed Malik to NW. NW probably ignored her as being the new gal on the block. And when the PhaseV article came out it made Wolf more credible and that is why she was chosen to interrogate NW/LP. Only later did NW learn then about the close relationship between Wolf and Macrocode and Cognate and then it was too late for NW since everything backfired.

[Rkmatters]

You're free to clarify your position on why you think his GBM catalyst pick is a bad one. I stated his writing on CLDX were being taken out of context. That was the subject of my debate and I clearly explained why. You only mentioned you disagreed and then went on to describe his pick as "laughable", and left it as that, without explanation.

I never opened up a debate as to AF's credibility but the subject came up repeatedly, to the point of me being asked about it and my judgment being repeatedly called into question. How can I side with an "enemy"! As if I should see him as guilty just because it fits with this iHub's view of his persona. It's bizarre.

Do any of us even need to concern ourselves if a biotech writer is credible to read his articles to find value in any of it? I suggest the answer to that is a resounding "NO". On that note, it doesn't even matter what I think of AF as an individual. I already had made it clear to TC that I do not know him. BUT it does prove my point that so many posters here are not able to see past how they perceive him as a person to be able to read his articles from an impartial perspective.

IMO, investors need to separate preconceived notions of the "messenger", whether it be NW Bio or the press or anyone here and just review the reported information, facts, and opinions, even read the skewed ones. That's what I do. I read everything written and then decide if I agree with any of it or not. I don't disagree with anyone on the basis of my "emotional" state, which was charged against me before the post were deleted. I formulate opinions upon review of all evidence, real or imagined. But it always goes back to me saying stop perceiving the "messenger" as be more important than the message. In my view, folks get caught up debating the pointer, they miss debating the point. Reality is AF's writings on NWBO, for the most part, are immediately viewed as suspicious and wrong. His motives are questioned, as is anyone or everyone who writes anything negative on NWBO, regardless if any of it is warranted or not! Everyone here is free to read and interpret his or anyone else's writings however they want to. But I find that if I suspend judgment, I'm able to read what is written --regardless of who writes it, regardless of their position or what their motivation might be -- that I'm a better informed investor. I can then research the claim and determine for myself if there any substance to it or not. And as you might have guessed it, at times I agree with skeptics and at other times I agree with hopefuls. I respect that I can have differences of opinions with both shorts and longs alike. I'm perfectly fine with seeing things differently and agreeing to disagree. But only rationale reasoning that explains a contrary view clearly can get me to change my opinion. And there isn't anything silly about that. :)