Thu, Aug 21, 2014, 8:06 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 1 hr 24 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

OncoSec Medical Incorporated Message Board

  • dkeating1986 dkeating1986 Jun 19, 2014 10:08 AM Flag

    Sponsor-Investigator Trial

    I know we've all been talking about the 3 options on how ONCS can start 2B in the near future as a combo trial, although ONCS doesn't have access to PD-1 yet. I feel like we haven't discussed, at length, the possibility of a Sponsor-Investigator Trial. I really would like to hear what this board has to say about that option. I'm a Controller, not a science-guru, but I really feel like this is the way ONCS will go. It would be a win, win for both ONCS & Merck. Merck gets to vet PD-1 and ONCS completes 2B and increases its value for a potential partner. Any opinions on the Sponsor-Investigator Trial option would be greatly appreciated.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I personally agree with you, but one of the many lessons I have learned over the years, is that we retail guys are usually way off when trying to predict what the company is doing. I had one exec tell me a couple years ago, that he would read the MB and chuckle about the theories we retails came up with. So who knows what will happen, I think Punit is a straight shooter, I trust him to make good decisions and won't second guess what he does. That's not blind faith, just based on where we are now.
      As for the S.I.T. one thing I do like is that even if another 10% dilution is needed to complete the P2b and market the drug, I still get 80% of the benefit in my stock, where as a partner would more likely dilute the earnings by more than 20% (they would of course reduce the risk as well). So advantages either way, I can't imagine a partnership is unavailable to ONCS, so if we don't get one its because ONCS did not want one.

      • 2 Replies to furbush87
      • Fur, that's a good point about retail theories related to what a company should or will do. I did investor relations for many years, and the internal decisions of management would often #$%$ess the possible effect of the decision on investors but rarely, if ever, were decisions made causally in the interest of driving the stock price up.

        Another thing that many investors don't understand is there is almost no consideration of day to day fluctuations in price. That's strictly a traders reference point. We cared about quarterly earnings, but generally the internal goal was simply to make sure we were going to meet consensus expectations so the stock was not a distraction. Missing earnings is never worth it. We guided every quarter to a range we were pretty comfortable with. Often we would pull back earnings in a bit if we met, to give us more financial flexibility for the next quarter. It's a real pain in the #$%$ being public. I would never willingly go public, but biotech's have to.

      • Couldn't agree more, Fur. I have absolutely no idea what will happen, but wanted to get some opinions on the SIT. I, too, believe that ONCS is in the driver's seat and will only go at 2B without a partner because that's what they want.

        Sentiment: Strong Buy

0.455+0.045(+10.98%)Aug 20 3:59 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.