I don't think the price reflects anything but year-end tax loss selling, people hating what they feel is a likely reverse, and no partnership for the time being which means more dilution. I guess people feel hopeless strictly due to the price? I'm not too worried, for some reason. Perhaps I'm becoming a glutton for punishment, but if a company fails with data as solid as GNSZ, then it would be the only example I've ever been able to find. I owned INHX at $.17-$.25 in 2008 and it was sold for a phase 3 hep C drug 2-3 years later for $26. Not all is lost.
I'm sorry, I gave you too much credit for actually using some logic. Obviously they need money to go along with the reverse. Note that Docs conversion and elimination of the loan improved the balance sheet a little, helping toward the shareholder equity requirement (basically $140,000 or so more equity). Can your brain process that?
I would take a reverse split, NASDAQ listing, and adequate capital without hesitation. A reverse isn't automatically a death sentence, but running out of money and being stuck on the joke called OTC is certain death.
This is the first. Yes, their comp has been internally approved each year, resulting in higher pay (and 2x ownership granted via options every time the stock is cut in half, since the bonus is in dollar terms divided by how ever many shares it takes to equal those dollars).
They've never had an annual meeting...they have one now because they have to given the magnitude of the items on the proxy (reverse split, executive comp, etc). Hopefully everyone votes electronically.
Thanks for the reminder on that interview, Dig. Where can it be found now? Thanks in advance. Oh, and the one most direct thing we can do is vote your opinion on the proxy. At least make non-insider disdain a matter of record!
I will withhold my own belief about why the highly esteemed doctor was added to the board, but he's certainly adding value through his assistance so far.
That said, don't we have enough scientists already? How about someone with biotech business experience (not being on the board of another OTC stock that hasn't delivered to shareholders) with some experience making the big move we're holding to make, and maybe some better industry connections? There has to be some kind of joke about how many scientists it takes to keep a biotech stock price from falling 90% peak to trough while the index tripled.
I still don't think this hurts at all, and I'm excited about the next 3 years.
The SEC on 10/14 posted a press release highlighting 6 firms fined (wrist slapped really) for short selling. Who is on it? None other than this abusive jerk:
"Sabby Management LLC – New Jersey-based firm agreed to pay disgorgement of $184,747.10, prejudgment interest of $2,331.51, and a penalty of $91,669.95."
I don't know that I buy in to the short "conspiracy." How much profit can be made by shorting even a million shares? Say it goes from $.70 to $.40. Why risk a fine or jail for the low $200,000-$300,000 profit at the most? It's illegal to short OTC and it makes more sense to me that someone expects to buy back in to another financing round at a discount higher than their average selling price to get out. If someone sold from $.95-$.30, that's a decent average exit to double up at $.25-$.30 later, hypothetically speaking. It screws everyone else, and forces the company o accept a bigger discount, but that at least is more believable.
The timing of the funding is totally up to the person funding the trust though, so clearly he feels that this is about as good as it will get to fund the trust while the value is low. You don't have to fund the trust immediately.
Thanks Dig, I spoke with an attorney friend who confirmed your thoughts. Totally unrelated to the trading. That said, it's still a positive that we saw volume spike as the seller got cleaned out and the stock ended firmly higher. Let's hope it continues!
What we saw Friday was clearly the one dedicated seller that has demolished our stock as of late getting totally cleaned up. We may simply stay here until another update, but heck, maybe we'll rally a few pennies as well. check out the form 4 insider filing made by Dionne...
How was my comment deleted, and why? What is this? Lol no disagreement at all with what you said but I have no idea what's happening with Marissa's (Yahoo! CEO) little message board here...
Nope. They have about $2 million on hand, which is plenty for the time being. In June they were down to $130,000 I believe, yet they got a $.70 financing deal. They had been at $.45 months prior. But it's irrelevant, if you have to value biotech based on cash on hand, the company has product problems. This company needs the funding to take through the final stage of development and I believe they're going to get it.
I apologize for twice calling you "Carmen." Long day! Haha. Hey I would point out that the decline does not rival common sense. Doc has conducted smaller financings in hopes of lessening dilution. Unfortunately, that funding strategy has actually exacerbated dilution (in terms of what COULD have been fewer shares), because investors have always had just far enough visibility to see that another financing is just around the corner, so why buy/bid up the stock beforehand. Rinse, repeat. I think the decline is one of the least mysterious occurrences. That's why 1) a larger financing to accelerate development should lead to Wall Street assigning fair value or 2) a partnership/Merger would obviously lead to the same.
I meant to say that the distance to completion is short enough that future dilution would have to be in fathomable to ruin the upside. $30-$40 million in funding won't ruin the upside.
Thanks for the response, Carmen. I don't know if it's enough time because I've never been involved in such a process, so I don't feel qualified to use an arbitrary December 31 deadline as reasonable for the definition of "soon" or "enough time." I've been waiting almost 4 years, so if it were March (for example) that's still soon to me. The quotes you attributed to Doc aren't disproven just because the stock is at $.35. The stock IS undervalued. 2015 was a tipping point, in the form of achieving the most solid phase 2 results for HCC and GBM that I've seen in my comparison to other companies. I regret that execution on funding was done in a piecemeal approach until now, but we can't change that. We can encourage the right thing going forward though- to be well-capitalized for the next stage of development as the partnership talks continue. Value creation occurs in pharma by creating a product that works while keeping an eye on costs. We have a long way to go (longer than the funds required to get to approval) before dilution ruins the upside, which keeps me in this thing in a big way.
I usually agree with you and Carmen but I really disagree here. "Performance targets?" I see, you mean timelines. That's a fair criticism, but that had nothing to do with the fantastic data on liver and brain cancer. This "end of the year is make or break" talk is getting really annoying though. Do you think that a partnership is completely in Docs hands? What about the other side of the table? The arbitrary timelines and black and white measurements of "the only options on the table" that some of you are assigning is flat out ridiculous. Consider this: maybe there is significant interest, but they need more time. Maybe they want to see the full brain cancer results and buy the whole thing instead of partnership for one indication, which is a more detailed and lengthy process. Maybe they're just taking time. Have you seen the Chinese market lately? Perhaps Chinese biotech companies have seen their share prices punished and they want to let the dust settle. Perhaps we have to raise $10-$15 million instead of the smaller raises that have been done and take the money concern off the table for the foreseeable future. If you use math, you'd see that even 150 million shares outstanding could still lead to a $15-$20 stock price down the road. Why is that not an option? Expand your minds!
Ok I just read it- October 2014. Before complete phase 2 data was even available, let alone interim GBM. That factually makes that guys opinion a joke.