Replies to post #541762 on NorthWest Biotherapeutics Inc (NWBO)

[vator]

“Thinking Combo Partnerships $NWBO
— Michael Bigger (@biggercapital) December 1, 2022”

He would be the best source at a guess for your question.

[Perk_Idaho]

Looking Good Billy Ray!

[SparkyATL]

“I will not be able to respond to this as I am only allowed to post once a day due to my previous violations of the rules, for which I am extremely remorseful (should any administrator read this)”

Best thing I’ve read all day :(/) wish I could give you my posts!

[D-Mike]

I like your style Viking. Can I defer my posts to you?

[Ready4Nxt]

Thanks for your thoughtful post, Viking. Thermo, Bright Boy and others have suggested (“word around the campfire”) that more news is coming before ASM. In my opinion, some sort of a deal or deals would be consistent with a continued quiet period (NDA’s). News of RA actions also would be welcome. Two important actions in a week are a good start!

[Chiugray]

Great post.

Adding 300BPS to the cost of borrowing also brings a smile to my face. Not sure when we will see a more realistic valuation of NWBO, but the lawsuit news should bring in more retail and traders as the news of it spreads throughout the next week or so. This is 'free' advertisement to a market that is sick and tired of MM's and HF's screwing the little guy and in our case the patients too. I think the trading in the next week or two will be volatile as the shorts will not give up easily. It will be a lot harder for them now that they don't have the cover of MM's to assist them in the bear raids.

[OncoJock]

I would think that they have at least gotten a guarantee from NWBO that they will have future access to Murcidencel, in one form or the other. It doesn't have to be an exclusive partnership guarantee or a buy out promise, but they would at least have gotten a non-exclusive right to use Murcidencel with Keytruda if trial is successful. JMHO

Would such a guarantee or promise need to be disclosed in an SEC filing?

Of could it be written in a way such that disclosure would not be required?

Or . . . could Merck obtain its supply of murcidencel from UCLA as opposed to NWBO?

[no2koolaid]

Enjoy the good news and have a nice glass of wine tonight.

I have and, fortified, will offer a business perspective. Again, just a lone view of a complex situation, but what grounds my business perspective is notable so...

We can all agree that Merck is a highly sophisticated, highly capable and very successful firm. That they are in a trial with NWBO conveys confidence (in Merck's mind) about the value of a combo trial. After all, a capable firm does not engage in costly efforts that offer limited or no prospects of future monetization of their own product, or the potential for something more. Nonetheless, Merck in a trial with a good candidate is like an 18 year old in the backseat of a car, they want to take it to the next level.

This is where we here hear Meatloaf singing "Paradise by the dashboard light" and the refrain from Linda Powers..."I can wait all night!"

All humor aside, it would be an abrogation of Powers fiduciary responsibilities (IMHO), to enter into anything but a partnership and, as you point out, not necessarily an exclusive partnership. If we view DCVax as having agnostic capabilities, the potential is extraordinary and the ceiling on the share price unknown. However, on the contrary, a buyout or even an exclusive partnership puts a ceiling on the benefit to shareholders. While I do not have an unshakable grasp of Powers capabilities as CEO, I know enough to say she has a firm understanding where things are, where they can be, and the best way to get there.