If your horizon is years, buy. If your horizon is months, hedge. In either case the massive potential of this puppy makes it a worthwhile risk.
Back in 2010 the company was still basically Thrifty Printing and those compounds you mention were actually photocopies of chemical recipes for compounds that had not actually been made. The uplisting to amex in 2010 could actually have happened if it wasn't for a chronic printer jam that would not quit. Uplisting paperwork never made it. Basically this company was a front for a prostitution ring but this one #$%$ happened to be a chemist on the side and after the company bigshots partied her into a comatose state one Vegas weekend (courtesy shareholder $$$ of course!), they rifled through her bags and unexpectedly came across her plans for 2-73. A couple cinder-blocks in the ocean later and a cooked-up story about some Greek scientist (ever hear a peep from him? -- didn't think so), the Thrifty scam had somehow stumbled its way into being a real scientific operation, ha. You just can't make this stuff up.
The poster title for AAIC already tells us that we'll definitely get data at AAIC, and that those data are great (since any cognitive improvement in Alzheimer's is great compared to the SOC, especially in ADCS-ADL where we already know the 12-wk data is amazing). The only question is whether Anavex will give both a poster and an oral presentation, or just a poster. Either way, the poster title already tells us definitively that we will get both 12-wk raw efficacy data and 12-wk PK/PD analysis (and perhaps a look at some 26-wk data as well).
The underwater stuff was part of the deal -- maybe it's drillable at some point, maybe it isn't. What matters is the good McMullen acreage, of which there is plenty.
Thanks for your faith, tro, haha, but I didn't manage my dry powder properly to take advantage of that window, alas! If I have another chance, believe me!
Latest posts were status quo -- relative doing well and seeing continued benefit from 2-73. Noted that 'doing well' should not be confused with 'cured'
Of course a cure is not needed to become new SOC in Alz, especially since the current SOC does not enable patients to 'do well' in ways discernible to caregivers, unlike 2-73
The later the partnership comes, the more advantageous and lucrative the terms (because the results will be more proven). Just because a partnership has not been struck does not mean that offers have not been put forward and then rejected by Anavex. It obviously suits BPs' interests to fish with low-ball offers and Anavex's interests to hold out for the best possible offer.
I did notice the drop to current prices, yes. I also noticed that past dilution was not the reason for the drop. You may have heard that the price of oil has been a bit on the low side lately? Hard for Sundance to control what the Saudis do. Past dilutions led to shrewd acquisitions that have averaged an excellent return on investment and transformed the company from non-op to op and gotten it a good chunk of choice acreage in McMullen. Unlike many of its peers, Sundance will survive, and since the price of oil will not be $50 or less for eternity, it will eventually thrive as well. As in the past, the new CR will help catalyze that, and I expect to be very happy with my .13 shares in the years to come (missed out on the .05 shares, alas).
Thanks, trollen, glad to hear from you and hope your summer's going well also. The sector doldrums have been rough, but this game ain't for the faint of heart, haha. I still believe Sundance is a winner in the end.
I think the Hampel quote is my favorite because of his evident surprise at how good the data turned out to be. 2-73 is a shocker, even to those who've seen it all before.
Actually, could do a full presentation of 38-wk data at CTAD as well, and an interim look at 52-wk data.
He mentioned Anavex but never focused on it, and that was years before the stock had its big run, which was based on good data. Obviously there is always plenty of pumping and bashing when a stock gets moving, and there was that element as well.
Wouldn't be surprised, given the pattern from the last two scientific conferences where they looked ahead. I doubt they'd give us the full set of 26-week data yet, but they do have it by now, so who knows, maybe. No bigger forum for it than AAIC.
I think around the time of phase 1b data release, first in anticipation of it, and then in response to any signals of efficacy in the psoriasis patients.
I forgot to add that the 2a trial data that lifted Anavex were not even completed data, but interim data, and the rise from the bottom started even before the first release of interim data, just in anticipation of it (from about 15-20 cents at the bottom up to 50 cents or so before the first batch of interim data was released). Since RCPI's phase 1b trial will involve psoriasis patients, whereas the Anavex phase 1 was in healthy volunteers only, I think RCPI may not need to wait until 2a to see a share-price boost due to efficacy signals.
Unfortunately, highly dilutive deals like the one with Maxim are necessary for cash-strapped little bios like RCPI. Maxim was not chosen out of cluelessness, but out of not having other options. Until the company gains more leverage with good trial results funded by the highly dilutive Maxim deal, it will be difficult to find a better option than Maxim.
On the bright side, I own another little bio, Anavex, that had to go through similarly dilutive deals with Maxim and similar outfits. After a long time in the wilderness, with the share price dropping from about $4-5 to 15-20 cents over the course of 2-3 years (somewhat a la RCPI) and floundering for a few months at the bottom, Anavex nevertheless managed to conduct a Phase I trial with the proceeds and initiate Phase 2a. When the company finally came through last year with some promising 2a trial results in Alzheimer's, the stock skyrocketed over the course of six months from 15-20 cents to about $3.50 (pre-split, 1:4). It fell almost instantly down from the $14.84 post-split top to about a $3 post-split low, and currently sits about $4, but those who were smart enough to sell some on the way up (unlike me) made a boatload, while even those who held are still sitting about 4x above the bottom.
So even though Maxim (and others like Maxim) caused massive dilution to the stock, it enabled the company to conduct its trials, and thanks to the strong science behind the compound (which I believe goes for anatabine citrate as well), the dilution did not prevent shareholders who averaged down at the lows from either recouping much of their loss from prior years or turning it into profit.
Anyway, that experience makes Maxim's presence here tolerable to me as a necessary evil to get anatabine citrate where it needs to go. Even massive dilution is not terrible for investors as long as it catalyzes significant growth. That has been the case for Anavex, and I believe it will be for Rock Creek as well.