I have no such issues with IV. I access it thru at least four different types of devices. I set up a list of "My Boards" a long time ago (have been a member since 2006) and updated it recently when Yahoo messed up. Now I simply go to the IV site and it recognizes me, I click My Boards and then NVAX. The display is a list of all postings in chron order. When you open any post you can click on "thread" and get only those...
Like i-Hub, IV is moderated. It helps a great deal to keep the postings an honest representation of members' opinions and keeps the junk posts away while still allowing anonymity. It seems the best option to me. We are still missing some good posters who seem trapped in this post apocalyptic Yahoo site. Please come join us.
About ten years ago, yahoo made a substantial change to their message boards and it created an exodus. The change was to the present (now old) format and, obviously, we adjusted. I set up accounts then at IV, RB, and iHub. This new YMB change seems impossible to work with and it is only a matter of time before one of the other boards has critical mass and the bulk of the discussion is there. I have made a few posts this week at IV since they already have a few good posters. Most here may not be aware but IV has been the initial source of some 'news' posted here, eg: the Maryland Economic Development grant.
I won't do Facebook. I have enough of a public and corporate presence that I would attract a following that would follow me into the real world. Not sure how Red does it. perhaps he is just anonymous enough, but I can't have anything that looks like financial advice attached to my real name.
In the past I have been very active on iHub, eg:HALO and IV, eg: Crucell. All it takes is a few good posters to make a good board. NVAX yahoo has been one of the best. We had old timers who remember rationale for CEO decisions ten years ago, researchers who never let a search engine mention go in-linked, others who looked for tangential science news, those with good knowledge of finance, and representatives of the medical and vaccine industries. Critical mass will form again somewhere. Maybe IV?
Yeah. No problems with my iPad getting here. I would be interested if there was a forum that discussed this change. Is there anyone, maybe a company rep, who supports this?
It's got nothing to do with retail consumer demand. Blood banks are nearly obligated to adopt Intercept for platelets, and that will come very fast. As the CFO? said, they will have a year to comply once the regulations are set. Then, it seems an easy addition to include plasma in the same lab. CERS is at least a year away from even starting a Ph3 trial for blood in the US. The adoption of Intercept for RBCs is the goldmine, but is the least certain market. But I like the "foot in the door" approach. Their future RBC customers will already be using the platelet product.
I suspect CERS gets acquired by a Baxter type sometime after CE blood is selling. Three billion in three years seems doable.
Good presentation, though the CEO always sounds like he needs a cup of coffee. Also, his habit of saying "ten x" instead of "ten times" is starting to bother me. Anyhow, I see little standing in the way of Intercept use for all platelets nearly everywhere. Then, the plan is to convince blood banks to adopt Intercept for plasma and, eventually, RBCs. It is likely to take some years but it seems doable.
- they use a process for removing psoralens that may be challenged by another patent holder. It is a court case likely waiting for the company to become profitable.
- viral hepatitis is not completely cleared from red blood cells by Intercept so testing each bag still needs to be done. This makes the value analysis much less certain for RBCs.
- they look likely to be profitable within a year. Especially now that BARDA is helping to fund red blood trials.
- this lowers the risk of another raise - at least with single digit SP, imo.
- likely revenues in a few years makes CERS a bargain at current market cap
Don't be. Old news. Discussed here ad nauseum.
The insiders have harvested a very small percentage of their overall position on a regular basis.
The bashes who bring this up again every month or so know full well what is going on. They never respond to reasonable discussion on the topic and they look to bring it up again on a regular basis to confuse newbies.
Thank you, Red! Though, very sorry to see you go. Your general knowledge about how vaccine companies think and act in certain situations was invaluable in helping us interpret specific Novavax news. Very generous of you. Hope to see your crusty barbs in another forum some day, if not here. If I ever run into you at a meeting, I'll be sure to introduce myself.
With your future endeavors, may your handicap be stable.
Who knows and, long term, who cares but my sense is that while earnings don't matter a bit for NVAX right now, it does for the IBB. My guess is that the big boys (GILD, AMGN, CELE..) are likely to surprise to the upside and bring the IBB up, which should mean some near term support for NVAX.
hi sudn - yes, I still have looong term shares in that co. :-)
You are not on the NVAX mb often so should let you know this lobster fellow we are talking about here today knows a thing or two about cancer vaccines and, in the past, has cautioned that live vectors may have a few more hurdles to jump through on the way to approval than non-live. But these are exciting times for cancer immunotherapy and I will continue to look for value in companies that might have a niche.
I think they smell that the general market is weak today and their handlers told them to turn up the excrement.
Most of the regulars know the drill, but in case there are any newbies who don't realize there are some good minds behind many posts here (not all pro NVAX, all of the time) keep reading. In particular, pay attention to mainly lobster. He is who they say he is. How do I know this? I have been investing in biotech since Genentech was founded. I have a lot of money invested. I pay attention. ML knows things about companies I've owned years ago that no one else would know. His take on the industry now is always exactly right. And I learn things from him and some others here I couldn't learn anywhere else.
Why would he or me or any of us post here? It's fun. I also post to some sports blogs when my wife or friends get tired of talking about my favorite team. My wife has little interest in my biotech portfolio - other than the bottom line. I can get her to talk about the Warriors on occasion.
Oh, and Gary Evans likely has close to 350,000 options to buy more NVAX stock on top of that reported direct ownership (haven't looked at what was awarded this year yet).
Correction: I remember now the Nature quote was from Phillips. Still, same tone on same topic.
Once again, birdy, nice find! Bloomberg today, Time magazine tomorrow. I have the feeling that NVAX will find itself increasingly in the middle of major news articles over the next few years as reporters will have the numbers of Erck and Glenn and Fries in their i-phones. Fun stuff. That said, the research for this article could have started any time in the past year and the Glenn quote is very much like his quote in Nature last fall in an article on the same topic. In other words, regarding sebring's speculation, it is a stretch to think his enthusiasm has anything to do with ph3 elderly results.
Neither here nor there for NVAX but, interestingly, AZ stock rose immediately after the 'leave' vote. From FierceBiotech:
"In fact, some Big Pharma companies may in the short term have a bounce from the result, with London's GlaxoSmithKline ($GSK) expected by JP Morgan to "significantly outperform both the FTSE 100 index and the Large Cap Pharma Universe" this morning, as well as a smaller benefit for AstraZeneca ($AZN), given the current weakness of the pound."
Regarding drug regulation and approvals, it may take a bit of time to sort out, but I'd expect GB to stay within the EMA. There are plenty of examples of non-EU countries who are part of that framework, eg: Norway. To opt out of that would certainly put AZ and GSK at a disadvantage but, of greater significance to the decision, it would put GB behind the rest of the EU as a market any company would want to capture and would delay drug availability to its citizens.
Interesting line of thought, birdy. But I don't think an ex-NA go-it-alone strategy works. We need that partner. We need that cash. But does Pfizer or Merck now make more sense? AZ and GSK might now have a more difficult ROI calculation. (Even Sanofi - meh)
The hospitalization cost per infant is higher than the per adult hospitalization cost. But the number of infected adults is much higher.
Then you have outpatient medical costs.
Then you add into both columns the biggie: the economic cost of lost production when a parent, son or daughter, spouse or the patient themselves can't go to work.
From approximating the costs to society of alcoholism or drug abuse to the costs of cancer or infectious disease, the lost productivity cost is almost always the largest number and is taken very seriously by the policy-makers.
I imagine all the thumbs down on your insider trading remark are only because it is old news and has been discussed ad nauseum. Since your blinders are off, perhaps you could remind the board who sold and how many shares and options they have left.
You're new to the board. Let me Give you one tip. I've had all oubra ids on ignore for a long time, the first since August. Discussions about TA with them will only drive you crazy.