InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

S_mack

12/07/20 12:23 PM

#336712 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Thank you, senti. Unfortunately this is par for the course w NWBIO, until hopefully it isn’t anymore.
icon url

eagle8

12/07/20 12:24 PM

#336714 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708


Thank you sentiment for sharing.

Best to you.
icon url

BioInvestor4

12/07/20 12:26 PM

#336718 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Which is what I thought all along... give the stock price room to run without flooding the market with shares...

Can’t understand why the market does not like this news...
icon url

Pablosrv

12/07/20 12:32 PM

#336722 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

What a disaster. Miscommunication at highest levels ever.
icon url

VikingInvest

12/07/20 12:33 PM

#336724 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Thanks Senti, that makes me feel with great certainty that the company is still blinded.
icon url

Goodtime13

12/07/20 12:33 PM

#336725 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

It has been and continues to be maddening that management releases non-publicly available information to message board posters.

How anybody is accepting of this is beyond me.
icon url

trocprofit

12/07/20 12:35 PM

#336728 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Seriously? He doesn't understand? So, he essentially told you we will not see topline anytime soon. Or, until the next time they need to extend.
And, no 8k?
When was it done?
Before or after unblinding?
If they put out an 8k and it says they just did the extension last week, it tells me (and the market) they do not have unblinded data yet, which would blow my mind. If they extended weeks ago, wouldn't they need to disclose that?

Several important questions, answers to which, I definitely do not understand.
icon url

Goodtime13

12/07/20 12:35 PM

#336729 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

One other quick question, for clarification:

When you call Dave Innes do you introduce yourself with your real name or does he call you Senti too?
icon url

flipper44

12/07/20 12:35 PM

#336730 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Ah, so this time the extension/suspension “package” does not involve additional/new warrants as a sweetener? Simply the exchange of another limited extension for the return consideration of not exercising for a limited time. No cherry on top this time. If those are the terms, then basin is likely right, the pps will increase over the course of the week.
icon url

Pablosrv

12/07/20 12:42 PM

#336740 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Is he stupid?
icon url

exwannabe

12/07/20 12:46 PM

#336744 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

They've obviously extended the warrants in the first place to allow a runway for the stock,


Did DI say that, or is that you talking?
icon url

Flexroy

12/07/20 1:30 PM

#336795 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Agreed senti, By pushing out the warrants we allow for price accumulation. TLD would be more reasonable further out from a warrant extension than closer to it.

I know people who are having them extended, and after the ruckus on the board this morning, and the subsequent quick drop in price, I spoke to DI to confirm.

He didn't understand why any shareholders would think they would release top line a few days before or after the extension expires. They've obviously extended the warrants in the first place to allow a runway for the stock, but the top line has simply not been ready for release in time with the previous extensions.

Perhaps the company thinks this next set of extensions finally will be?

icon url

Lykiri

12/07/20 7:20 PM

#336948 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Sentiment,

Thanks for sharing the information. Much appreciated and all so logical!
icon url

Basin Street Blues

12/08/20 4:41 AM

#336992 RE: sentiment_stocks #336708

Senti , so what do you think would have happened to the price on 14th December if there hadn't been a rukus yesterday and a tacit admission of the extension by Innes ? ... and in any case my opinion is whoever sold yesterday probably about 1.5m shares had already made their mind up to sell by virtue of the fact if you've got that level of investment you'd understand a definitive short dated warrant extension is positive not negative vs the undefintive end date situation we were in.

Also Marzan posted the warrant extensions discussions weeks ago so there`s nothing new about it that`s for sure but the fact I posted early Feb & early March as opposed to no definitive end date , is that positive of negative ?

Also I see the 240m-400m warrants extended to the start of Feb & March line that LG and DI have told many warrant holders has been posted by AEKust this morning, do you think that`s a bad thing that its now in the public domain ?

To my mind when this is properly digested punters will be left
with no doubt the extensions do not mean TLD in mid to late January ie a few days trading days prior to the Feb 1st exercise date, it means anytime from kind of now to first week of January and a few days prior to a Lancet or equivalent publication noting that the Lancet publish weekly and have fast track for data release. The Lancet's next publication dates are 12th & 19th December...

So the result of yesterdays `rukus` is that :

a) We know the extensions are short dated and there`s no longer room for the bashers to start the ASCO 2030 b/s
b) We know they are aiming for 400m to be tied up which I think is
100m + more than last time.

Net net to my mind we are in a better place than we were Friday night and have removed a great deal of conjecture over wtf is going on with the December 15th exercise date.

Last but not least we can assume Marzan was probably not the first to be called re the warrants so they`ve been working on this for at least a month, so must be close to conclusion if not already sorted.