Worth re-posting my comment from July 2012. The only difference is that NWBO's market cap is roughly 4 x the 2012 figure & IMUCRAP is roughly 10% more than 2012.
NWBO vs IMUC
by sharestwo •Jun 25, 2012 4:04 PM .
I totally agree that there's no reason to invest in NWBO as opposed to IMUCRAP other than
*NWBO's superior technology
*NWBO is in Phase 3
*NWBO mart cap $35m / IMUCRAP $135m
*Well designed trial Vs Joke Trial that has no chance of achieving statistical significance
*Significant grant from top scientific / clinical center
*NWBO's Superior IP position
*NWBO doesn't fudge it's enrollment data
*Imminent trading on NASDAQ
*NWBO doesn't have a snake oil salesman as a CEO unlike IMUCRAP
Other than that I totally agree with you......LOL!!!!!
Whether you like it or not, IMUC's failure will reflect heavily on NWBO because they have virtually synonymous technology and are both working on the same indication. I'd rather lose 2.72/share than 3.40/share if that happens. To each his own.
That is the most asinine thing I have ever heard. If these companies are tied together in success and failure, which I believe they are, the lower capital exposure, as you call it, is in NWBO. Their share count is lower, thus if perceived values are equal, you are getting more bang for your buck out of NWBO. Even when NWBO does another capital raise, their share count will still be lower.
And they are superior ,a lot future ahead in the studies,three contenents, and Linda gets much,much more accomplished with the moneythey get. To me it is more about the share count combined with study progress. is how it's value is determined. Just for the record I believe IMUC will do well like NWBO, you just get a much better return for your investment as long as they come through