Replies to post #233713 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[ilovetech]

Lorie3168, bingo! Same thoughts/questions I've had for a long time.

ILT

[CherryTree1]

THEY ARE SCARED $HI$LESS.
$133 billion globally in 2017, up from $96 billion in 2013 in cancer revenue at stake by a disruptive DCVAX technology, no toxic side effects like chemo and appears to be effective even with some solid tumor cancers (GBM for one) that really have no effective treatment currently.

[biosectinvestor]

Key points...

1) that article is about technologies used to artificially mass produce individualized vaccines. It’s kind of a contradiction in terms, but that’s what they really mean when they are talking about cost. The difference here and there is that that is like “digital” and we’re “analog”. The reality is that probably, in this case, analog will likely prove to be many times superior, in fighting cancer, but digital will be mass producible and cheap. They might have 3, 4 or 5 targets and even expand the number over time that are easy to create in combination. Maybe their platform is unlimited, hard to know. The mass produced option, in my view, will be broadly available, but will likely only work to some degree and temporarily, assuming a technology and process is ultimately validated.

So they’re not really speaking as broadly as the article suggests. These differences will become more apparent over time, I believe.

2) NWBO is a penny stock... many respectable publications may even sometimes talk of DCVax, but many such publications do not want to be used to promote “penny stocks” as a policy. It’s not always a meaningful description, but they have no idea. So that can also keep the company from getting it’s due coverage. Be patient, as if this is validated, that will likely change.

Good luck to all.

[biosectinvestor]

Also, the sponsors and larger parties behind the trials (Genentech in this instance) that get so much attention tend to have many academic and medical allies and to be a source of major dollars for research and other purposes. So they have a high profile, in the circles of those writing about such things. It’s also a social and career circuit, where deep pockets command attention.

Little companies like NWBO are not players in those research circles, the pay for play networking circuits, and charitable funding spaces.... a big conference space once a year can’t compensate for not being relevant to these circles the rest of the year. But that’s not just an NWBO challenge and it usually resolves itself with success.

I would not stay too concerned about it. It’s a bigger issue for shorts to emphasize to create doubts than it is a meaningful touchpoint on the status of the research or the science behind the research. Validation, should it happen, will likely change everything.

Key though, there will also be many with long blades ready to give a big, dangerously pointy bear hug on success too...a congratulations, but we’ll get you - kind of response...