Goutah, yes I agree totally that there are risks in investing to any company without any income for several years and only possible income if everything goes well. I wrote that Stash thinks perhaps that level 1.70 is irrational high, not you. But thank you for making everything even more clear.
I never said that $1.70 is irrationally high for Prana today. If I considered $1.70 to be irrationally high, I'd sell my shares right now. This stock could go to $100 in a decade. It could also go to $0. I'm willing to risk the latter scenario in order to have a shot at the former, which is why I continue to hold my shares. That's why smart people call early-stage biotech stock ownership "speculation" instead of "investing".
What I said is that just because an early-stage biotech company meets the following criteria does not guarantee that shareholders will get rich anytime soon:
1 - It's the leader in its field.
2 - It has demonstrated amazing pre-clinical results.
3 - The MOAs of its therapies have been well characterized.
4 - It has demonstrated moderately impressive Phase II clinical results for one of its products.
5 - The market for its products is enormous, assuming that those products end up being as effective as hoped.
Geron met all five of these criteria by a wide margin a while back. It still meets all five, but not by as wide a margin as it used to. But long-term holders of the stock have either lost money or broken even, given that it's trading near its all-time lows. I thought Geron was cheap at $10 in 1999. Now it's at $2. Geron still has a lot of promise even though it has abandoned some of the more exciting avenues it was once pursuing. But I actually think Prana's a better bet at the moment simply because its market cap is so minuscule compared with its potential. Geron, even at its current price, has a quarter-billion-dollar market cap, while the potential market for the products that Geron is currently developing is probably a lot smaller than Prana's.
Prana meets all five of the above criteria today, but this fact in and of itself does not guarantee that the stock will be at $100 ten years from now. Or even $2, for that matter.
>> [Geron] is not the leader in its field by a long way. <<
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Geron has a near-total patent stranglehold on everything having to do with telomerase. Ask any telomerase researcher about that. With regard to human embryotic stem cells (hESC), Geron is the first company to commence an FDA-approved clinical trial of an hESC-based therapy. To my knowledge, it is currently the only company to have an FDA-approved clinical trial underway.
I guess it's time to put you back on my ignore list, kadaicher. I've never shorted a stock in my life, and I've owned Prana since 2006. I just have a limited tolerance for bullsh*t and I end up wasting a lot of time responding to it. Your emotional attachment to this company is so extreme that you feel personally threatened whenever someone tries to inject into the argument anything that contradicts your irrationally optimistic predictions. In your distorted view of the world, anyone who calls any portion of your fantasy into question has to be a liar or a short-seller. This would seem to indicate that you're delusional. Such people can't be reasoned with.
Further ahead like hell. You forget I was on a vaccine stock. Dendreon was 5+ years after their phase2s were complete.
Once you have raised a bunch of cash in a tech bubble it is a whole different ball game. Same as Dendreon, they had about $200m in the bank to play with when the 2s were finished.
82% in two groups and 42% in all 4 groups. That is all measures of executive function. 42% in all measures. 42% in all measures.
Narrowly missed ADAScog.
Of course the response will be durable. They have seen the brains connections re growing.
In just 3 months.
This is not thje Geron site. That loser company you chose to invest in is not the leader in its field by a long way. Prana right now has the lead compound in Alzheimers. I dont have any time or I would go into it with much more detail.
ELN is the only model here worth looking at.
This is not the Geron board, and Prana is nothing like Geron. You short again Goutah?
Goutah, I agree with you that pps of Geron at $60 was irrational in 2000. But it is not so clear that 1.70 is irrational for Prana today. It may be irrational expensive for Stash( he is not buying), just rational for you (you do not sell or buy?) and irrational cheap for Kadaicher and some others who are considering to buy more. This depends on many different things as you understand previous experience, occupation, understanding of brain pathology, understanding risks in drug development, wealth, risk profile etc. But it is nice to read different arguments of buying, selling and holding. Thanks to you that you have told why you do not get too excited about Prana and thanks to Kadaicher when telling us why his excitement is even increasing!
>> [Prana has] done one thing Geron didnt do. They have reversed Alzheimers. <<
They reversed AD for a 12-week period in two out of five cognitive measures (the trail marking and executive function portions of the four-part NTB). After re-working the data, they found that the composite NTB score improved a bit, but this was presumably due to the improvement of the two components mentioned above. ADS-Cog scores did not differ from those of the control group, though after re-working the data they found that they had come close to achieving stat sig. We have no idea whether the reversal of the two NTB scores would have continued with longer treatment.
And Geron has done lots of really impressive things Prana hasn't done.
>> [Prana is] going after an orphan drug candidate as a fast route to market <<
So is Geron with its clinical trials of its GERNVAC1 vaccine for treatment of a rare form of leukemia that qualifies it for orphan drug status. Geron is actually farther ahead, having completed a full Phase II trial.
>> You cant compare a company living in the old tech bubble. <<
Sure you can. Geron's science bears no relation to the stock-price inflation of the tech bubble -- a bubble from which Geron's stock only briefly benefitted. And Geron was able to keep raising big money long after the tech bubble burst.
I'm not comparing Geron's science with Prana's science, because they have completely different targets. I'm comparing the irrational optimism of Geron's shareholders a decade ago with the irrational optimism of some of Prana's current shareholders. The fact that one company is targeting one set of diseases and the other company is targeting a different set of diseases is of no relevance.
Get real Goutah. You cant compare a company living in the old tech bubble. Prana has done it the hard way. They have been given nothing much, and they have done one thing Geron didnt do. They have reversed Alzheimers. Stem cells of course are still being persued.
I am not trying to bad mouth Geron. They are just both very different.
Prana is already past the point of Proof of Concept as far as I am concerned.
They are going after an orphan drug candidate as a fast route to market just as Elan did with great success and is now worth $6,000,000,000 as a result.
Elan is the perfect model.
At one stage there was talk on the Elan board of a possible merger with Pran.
Just to add some historical perspective, in 1999 Geron, Inc., an early-stage biotech company, appeared to be in the leading position to develop radically effective new treatments for cancer, various age-related problems, heart disease, diabetes, and paralysis caused by spinal cord injury. Their patent portfolio related to telomerase, human embryonic stem cell science, and nuclear transfer medicine was impressive. The science they were doing showed enormous promise in the pre-clinical phase. They were able to sever the spinal cords of rats, then regrow the damaged portion and enable the rats to walk again (or at least hobble). They were able to grow human heart muscle tissue in vitro that was genetically matched to a patient. What's more, the new heart muscle was engineered to be immortal, meaning that there was no Hayfleck Limit to the number of times the muscle cells could regenerate. So someone with a damaged heart could have the new tissue surgically grafted without the need for anti-rejection drugs, and the damaged portion would become literally better than new. Geron was also developing a universal anti-cancer drug using its telomerase-sensing technology, plus a telomerase-activation therapy to permanently restore a person's skin to its youthful condition. And other radical stuff.
I bought my first shares in 1999 at $10, thinking I was tapping into a bargain. During the NASDAQ bubble of 2000, the shares shot to $60. I held like an idiot. Geron is now trading at about $2, and the company is still nowhere close to having a drug on the market, despite having had a couple of successful Phase II trials for one of their cancer treatments (for which the MOA was well understood). They've never gotten as far as a Phase III trial on any of their products.
Goutah, just to add some more relevant perspective, a better comparison in the neurology field would be Elan who developed a nice little MS drug while they were playing with Alzheimers.
They now have a market cap of just under 6 billion dollars, sales of 1.1B(about what you could expect from Huntingtons) and still havnt turned a profit or no Alzheimers drug approved.
That is a $6,000,000,000 market cap.
There is huge money if you can reverse neurodegenerative diseases like Pran has already done in a human clinical trial.
They have enough for the Huntingtons trial. They are ready to go just waiting on regulatory process, which is out of their control to complete and then is full ahead.
the market knows prana needs money...i hope pran raise this money soon even at these prices and begin this 2 clinical trials...other 6-7 millions shares are a little diluition to move ahead in a huge potential market...