InvestorsHub Logo

revenue_monster

06/21/13 1:24 PM

#128839 RE: investingdog #128831

investingdog, could not agree more. 20% is not going to do it

BioChica

06/21/13 2:07 PM

#128846 RE: investingdog #128831

They should not have any leaks! I believe they had a leak, before 2nd line was released! look at the chart. But it could have been a run up like Celsion had, before the news release!

Look at Celsion no leaks! No one knew! Period! They got slaughtered!

It does not matter if it is open label or double blinded! This data has to be kept secured to insiders only! Anyone viewing this information from outside the company 'Partner', would have to sign a non disclosure agreement!

spacey

06/21/13 4:15 PM

#128872 RE: investingdog #128831

Agree with that post. You talk about law suites that will happen from investors, if a leak is what is bringing the price/share down. The further it goes the less confidence that the data is good.

Protector

06/21/13 7:33 PM

#128911 RE: investingdog #128831

investingdog, there is nothing of the sort going on AT ALL! If your leak theory is correct then all the people hearing the leaked information should have PPHM shares to sell. These are no trader and don't short stock.

About the 15/25% improvement! Some companies dance on the table if they have 10% improvement, certainly in a hard to cure cancer like NSCLC. Why wouldn't 15 to 25% not be a good result then?

But OK if you have higher hopes then be my guest and prepare the setting for a possible disappointment. Not all clinical trials of PPHM are going to score 60% improvement like 2nd ln NSCLC that would be totally miraculous. Even realizing such a score once is a small miracle. I prefer to set the setting for a possible surprise and stay realistic. 15+% is what we need, about 20/25% is what I expect, 50% is what I hope for and in case of 50+% you know what I do with the champagne.