12 months ago the share was approximately $1.80 cdn. During this 12 month period a number of key objectives have been met and with these accomplishments I believe we all expected a substantial increase in the value of the shares, which has not happened. The market place clearly doesn't think this stock is worth much,and there is much left to convince the investment community, especially with Rodman's recent downgrade. Why? The most recent financing, although I didn't agree with the timing, puts the company into a strong financial position but none of this seems to be getting the attention of the market. There are a number of trial results anticipated over the next few months but can they be any better than what has been released thus far. It appears more and more ONCY can't secure a partner at a price acceptable to management expectations, which appears to leave only one option, go it alone. Can they do it and what will this cost the shareholders? Do we have more years of toiling with an under performing stock?
Venture... until a company actually starts commercializing a venture and starts making a profit... it's NOT a "stock"... it's an "opportunity" and a "story". In the case of Oncolytics Biotech... the "story" appears to be a good one. But as with any biotech that must go thru clinical trials... the story is not a FAST one. So if you are looking for fast and an immediate return... ONCY the company or the stock is not for you. Hence I would suggest you sell and others will likely buy your stock. The company and investors need two things... patients (for more clinical trials) and patience... because this is not a fast process. Tough decision... if I recall correctly you're in your 60's and it sure would be nice to have a nice triple or home run so that you can go off and play and enjoy your years before you get too old. Hell... I'm pushing 50 and I certainly want to do the same thing. I too would like to have a nice triple or double so I can go off and play a bit more. But if you're looking for a killing and or quicker return and you have a fair appetite for risk... I'd say just go to Vegas and throw a bunch of money on red at the roulette table and see what happens. I'd say the chances with Oncy are really going to be very similar to that spin at the roulette wheel. But at least with roulette... you'll probably find your answer MUCH sooner. Personally I believe Oncy is worth the wait... even if it takes another couple of years to get there. The reality is that the fight on Cancer has been going for at least 40 years. Another year or so is a drop in the bucket in that span of time. For more perspective on that take a look at this article from the NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.html?scp=4&sq=cancer&st=cse Good luck and happy new year.
The NYTimes article states:
"The dream of many cancer researchers is to find a way to prevent a cancer cell’s environment from allowing it to grow. They could then prevent cancer." - With that thought think oncolytic viral therapy where the cancer cell's environment is changed through the intravenous of live reovirus that multiply and selectively target cancer cells for destruction.
If the years 2000 to 2010 will become known as the Naught Decade and the Decade of Excess And Destruction (D.E.A.D), then the next decade will be known for its medical innovation and technological successes for the general benefit of mankind.
I suggest that you go and see the soon to be released movie entitled "Extraordinary Measures" staring Harrison Ford. Instead of following the dogma of the past decade, that includes greed, deception, malice, extravagance, and a self-centred view of life, take the extraordinary measure of reaching out to your fellow man to make their lives just a little better.
Tagline: "Don't hope for a miracle. Make one."
unfunnyloserguy posted this fraud crappola:
and this is a guy who already has lost a lot of money on ONC
<<Venture... until a company actually starts commercializing a venture and starts making a profit... it's NOT a "stock"... it's an "opportunity" and a "story". >>
what a crock of unmitigated shite, a stock is a stock because a company has shares (aka stock), it is also a stock in a publicly owned company because it is trabeable .
ONC is a stock, plain and simple. it may be a stock that. it may be a pathetically underperforming stock but it is still a stock. it may be a very high risk stock but it is still a stock. it may be...
"12 months ago the share was approximately $1.80 cdn."
Oncy was 1.18 US one year ago on Dec 30 2009, 1.45 Canadian.
"Do we have more years of toiling with an under performing stock? "
The RBC analyst doesn't think so - he believes Onc has a 70% chance of being approved for H&N and has a $5 Cdn target price with a much higher potential for other indications.
About a year or so ago some other analyst (forget the name) put a target price on Onc of 3.00 when it was below $2 and he was correct.
I think the company knows what it has and is not going to give it away cheaply. If the Big Pharmas arn't ponying up enough right now to partner then it is the correct thing to do to go further alone before partnering. IMO.
assuming you are not part of the criminal element in cowpattytown that has been such a fraudulent gang regarding ONC i will provide you the insite you desire. i accep the share price as being indicative of what the market values ONC (its assets, liabilities, prospects, etc) and "oddly" the responses to you to date have been from the fraudsters, rubes and pumpers, but now for some truth:
a) ONC has increased its share base by approx 50% in about the last year, and much of that huge dilution has been for very cheap share prices and very "odd" arrangements; lots of cheap shares likely traded out after the last "surprise" financing (although truth be known i did call it fabulously well)
b) ONC is led by BT (the incompetent), that is almost by itself nuff said, but he is simply the most incompetent CEO i've ever seen for a biotech; he has no record of success in any biotech venture he has ever been involved in; he is a serial and nonstop loser in this regard (i always challenge the fraudsters to post any success he's had (and by success i don't mean managing to keep his job but i mean leading any therapy to market)
c) strategic error and failure after srategic error and failure on the therapy front; it now appears that ONC's abandoning local admin was another huge strategic error (que up biovex); i also suggest going for non-front line status in H&N is very suboptimal to going for front line status (and of course if biovex gains front line status what will happen to reolysin's potential market, i suggest it will decrease and potentially substantially)
d) highly questionable transactions and transactions that kill shareholder wealth creation; that very "odd" deal with some failed dickass biotech in Edmonton (Valens or something like that) is a perfect example; IMO warrants based financings are "weak firm" financings that will by default almost always pressure share price over and above normal diluation (and ONC has used this candy as its base financing strategy)
e) a very weak BoD's; who on that BoD's has any significant successful biotech expertise; what do all those directors from cowpattytown and alberta bring to ONC??? IMO nothing that can't be replaced and upgraded
f) partnership crappola shite spewing by BT (the incompetent); he has been spewing about potential partnership for years and years and years and has failed miserably to deliver a partnership
g) failed, deficient and pathetic communications; BT (the incompetent) spews a non-stop drool of WABS (que up the most recent crappola re. this PIII trial) that IMO destroys shareholder confidence
h) highly questionable business actions; why buy a piece of some crappola BC biotech??? why start up a subsidiary in some island in the caribeann with directors that are not id'ed to shareholders (will this create or destroy potential shareholder wealth)??
so in sum IMO ONC largely due to BT (the incompetent) and the incompetent BoD's is an exceptionally high risk investment (and less from the reolysin/clinical side and much more from the incompetent leadershi, execution and decision making side) is valued where it is valued.
so why do i stay an owner of ONC, entirely because i believe Reolysin will some day before the end of time make it to the market.
and PS i have learned from experience to never believe any shite that BT (the incompetent) spews, double all his timelines and you will do much better.
I agree, I am sure the company is doing everything it can to save up and release the press releases after jan 1st. No need to release in 2009 when there is plenty of year end tax selling going on.
Yo king hasbeen
Your reading comp is problematic, ONC/Y is not sitting on material information regarding new SPA's. I said that I felt there was sufficient results from the both Sarcoma PII and Pallvative Reo/Rad PII to allow ONC/Y to apply for a SPA in either. The results are public. Hence, they are sitting the potential not hidden information. The post in question further speculated the reason for no action on the two indications above was that they are awaiting public results on something else, like the PII for pre-screen EGRF in NSCLC.
Another item that nobody talks about much is the cheapness and ease of manufacturing of Reolysin. If it works as well as we all hope on multiple cancers (in combination or not) it is easy to imagine that Reolysin could be made available at a very reasonable price and under cut other therapies in the market place. In other words if it works as we hope it has a good chance of becoming a ubiquitous therapy. IMO
disagree, ONC/Y IMO is sitting tight on at least 2 potential SPA application should they wish to apply. Quoting directly from Dr. Thompson, approval for a PIII is not that hard to get if it has been proven safe. The Sarcoma trial is an obvious slam dunk if ONC/Y were to apply for a PII under a SPA. Also I believe a palliative Combo Reo/Radiation could qualify.
By the silence ONC/Y must be waiting for something better. I think this silence is a good sign, like results from the NSCLC pre-screened EGRF trial?
ONC can hold any information as long as they want, if it doesn't impede business or effects the shareholders in adverse way...as long as it is not released to any other parties.
And you are fooling yourself if you think that nobody( insiders) benefits from news about to be released. At any company. Unless they are bunch of chimps err chumps.
Pardon my ignorance but if ONCY has some material information, how long do they have to release it? can they hold on to it untill all their buddies load up before releasing it to the street? Is it legit to keep it under wraps till "next year"?