Different slide deck but point taken. Still, Moldova is not a first world nation with first world standards of reliability. Part of former Soviet Union so still a red flag for me.
Yes, Replicor's claims are very impressive until one realizes that their clinical testing was done in Bangladesh (see slide 7 - EASL 2015 Presentation found at Replicor website). This is a big red flag and explains IMO why the Hep B establishment isn't doing cart wheels over Replicor results.
Please accept the following comments in the spirit of good faith discourse and exchange of views.
I cautiously couched my initial comment here for fear that what I thought was simply a fundamental understanding of how the FDA works (i.e., the need to prove the safety of new delivery compounds like a DPC 2.0 before advancing same in later stage trials) was somehow mistaken.
While I appreciate your willingness in this instance to say you might be wrong, what strikes me about many of the posters on this board, and I include you in this category, is a willingness to make statements that are simply factually wrong or are based on fundamental misunderstandings. Almost always, this tendency skews in favor of supporting a bullish story in favor of ARWR.
You are seen by many readers here as the leader of this board. What you say is adopted as gospel by many of these readers. As such, I believe you have a responsibility to refrain from posting assertions unless you are absolutely sure of the accuracy of those assertions or have included appropriate caveats to alert the reader.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe any reformulation of DPC will have to undergo safety trials. IOW, I do not believe ARWR could simply move directly into Phase 3 with DPC 2.0 (even assuming all else is on track) unless DPC 2.0 has already successfully completed Phase 1 trials.
Investron, your comments are pure bunk.
"I have repeatedly observed how he unloaded while telling people to buy and loading up while telling people to get out.
"Specific examples with regard to ARWR: While telling followers that ARWR would be $200 within a year, Dirk dumped what he bought around $2 at around $9 and rolled the loot into TKMR at the end of 2013."
This is pure nonsense.
I followed DH's comments closely and do not ever recall him saying that his price target for ARWR was $200. I recall his price target being $30 set in early summer 2013 when ARWR was around $2. (Pretty good call by any standards.) (If you're right, you should be able to easily give us a quote with a date DH made the statement so readers can actually confirm your claim. After all his entire blog is available to anyone online.)
Stop blaming others for you being clueless about the ways of Wall Street.
Do you have any insights or explanations for the following:
CEO Awde persistently buys GSV shares on the open market for over a year but then when GSV finally cuts the deal with OGC, initially he was a bit schizophrenic both buying and selling shares. His latest activity shows what seems like persistent selling at a loss.
I am surprised by the open handed tone of this last reply. Your earlier posts directed at me gave the impression you had a chip on your shoulder.
As for why I own ARWR, I have owned a healthy chunk since the low 2's going back about 2 years (my history on this board goes back over 2 years from about when ARWR went from $2 to 28 so if you wanted to challenge me with something substantial rather than imagined there should be plenty of fodder.) I sold a chunk at $7+ when ARWR tripled and said so on this board. I bought more again recently in the low $6's because I think it will run into the AD event. Longer term, ARWR is a show me stock. Management has over promised, under-delivered and generally mismanaged expectations. I am a big fan of DH and he thinks ARWR is very undervalued.
I get the impression you think I am a shill for ALNY. However, if you read carefully my posts about ALNY, I am just trying to correct statements of fact that seem rampant on this board but are rarely challenged. I tend not to challenge statements that simply assert that ALNY is a bad future investment and the like. This is typical message board fare. But factual claims that are demonstrably false, these I will challenge from time to time if I can muster up the time and energy. (The idea that ALNY achieved its current valuation on nothing other than the BSing capabilities of its ethically challenged CEO are silly and me pointing this out or pointing out false assertions of fact does not make me a shill for ALNY.)
As for why I do not own ALNY, the main reason is I feel I have missed the boat. ALNY has gone from single digits to over $120.00. I have been burned too often trying to hop on a speeding train. It really is that simple. But having kept abreast of the biotech space for the past several years, much of what passes here for fact is often so ill informed as to be dumbfounding. Case in point: holdencf on ALNY.
While I don't recall holdencf claiming to have been a member of ARWR's board and therefore believe you are mistaken on that point, the tenor and tone of his posts on this board tell me he is a flake (i.e., bombastic, strident and erratically unreliable). I questioned him closely and found his answers decidedly lacking in actual knowledge and completely lacking in candor. He made broad sweeping claims that he couldn't back up. His ranting and raving on this board about communism, socialism and the lazy work habits of the Greeks tells me his internal compass is "broken." I think he is one of those posters more interested in trying to impress others than in keeping abreast of his investment in ARWR.
In other words, your instincts that there is something deeply suspect about holdencf are, in my opinion, correct.
P.S. I believe I was the poster who originally asked holdencf why he bothered to post on this board. This followed his recitation a couple of weeks ago of the history of ARWR that I said "had the ring of truth." Regrettably, I no longer hold that view.
You are a most impressive thinker.
For you to have managed to sniff out the fact that I am an ALNY employee, paid to read the ARWR message board and post disinformation in order to keep ARWR from challenging ALNY for RNAi leadership bragging rights, is damn impressive. You must have had special training. I tip my hat to you (and your teachers).
My one request is that you refrain from publicizing this information. In the event my employer were to learn that my cover has been exposed, my lucrative employment position would be in jeopardy. Thanks in advance.
Question: Why does Investron constantly decry what he repeatedly calls "circle jerk" posts? (After all, Investron is the king of posting pointless drivel punctuated with ad hominem attacks for no reason other than infantile amusement and attention seeking.)
a. Investron's posts are viewed as irrelevant by the vast majority of ARWR message board readers/posters. This fact is intensely painful for investron as he is desperate to feel relevant (on an anonymous message board no less!).
b. As self-proclaimed Fearless Leader, Captain and Head Cheerleader of ARWR, Investron is intensely jealous of hparch who garners quite a lot admiration from ARWR longs.
c. Investron is upset he is not at the center of the "circle jerk" (a disturbing but entirely apt image. By posting his pointless and mean-spirited abuse, Investron becomes the focus of his own self-centered "circle jerk.")
d. All of the above.
I seem to recall that AS said the contract(s) have a clause permitting the pharmas out of their K's if AS is replaced. Perhaps I am naive but I don't think we will see any real takeover action without AS pulling the strings. I also feel quite sure that AS will get all of his options exercised or he will do his utmost to block any takeover. JMO.
holdencf, you wrote:
"What is false is to state that the most recent version of ALNY's GalNAc has proven to be safe. You have aserted that repeatedly."
With those 2 sentences you have attributed to me statements that I never made and then claim them to be false. I never said any such thing and certainly not repeatedly.
I challenge you to quote from even one of my posts wherein I claim that ALNY's GalNAc-ESC compounds are safe. And I emphasize the words, "I claim" because no such statement was ever made by me.
holdencf, my first instinct was to respond to you with a decent amount of vitriol. But rather than repay your sarcasm with even more, I'll just say that you made claims that proved demonstrably false. Had there been any basis to your claims, it would have overturned what I thought was settled fact as an investor in RNAi biotech. That is why I questioned you the way I did. If I am wrong I want to know because being wrong is a recipe for financial losses. And the funny thing is just a day or two earlier I read your post discussing the history of ARWR and I stated on this board that I thought your recitation of that history had the ring of truth. That is why I am so disappointed with your sweeping and cavalier dismissal regarding ALNY. You made factual claims that you asserted were the basis of that sweeping dismissal but those factual assertions have proven to be demonstrably false. Even worse, when those claims were shown to be demonstrably false, you didn't man up. And that is too bad because you might have been a reliable source of valuable knowledge. Sorry to say that is clearly not the case.
Thanks for asking.
I had an extended exchange with holdencf (see thread "Questions for holdencf").
He made several statements about ALNY that seemed factually wrong. During the course of the exchange he asserted, iter alia, that ALNY's GalNAc-ESC (what he called GalNAc.v.2.0) hadn't yet produced any human clinical data because ALNY's GalNAc-ESC had not yet entered any human clinical trials, not even phase 1 human clinical trials. This is clearly wrong. ALNY reported human clinical data regarding GalNAc-ESC late last year. As the original thread had become unwieldy, I started this new thread to correct once and for all what seems a pervasive but wrong view held by many who post on this board.
With regard to your question, "What difference does it make if both [ARWR and ALNY] work?" I think they both work and I have no anti-ARWR agenda. I don't have any position in ALNY (as I have stated several times) but do own a substantial amount of ARWR. I was buying more ARWR recently in the low $6's.) Almost daily I see factually wrong statements on this board (many about ALNY). I am simply tired of seeing these clearly false statements being endlessly repeated.
I hope you enjoyed today's news and stock appreciation.
(Cont. from previous post)
“These early results for ALN-AT3 from our ongoing Phase 1 study demonstrate knockdown of antithrombin of up to 57% at low microgram/kg subcutaneous doses of drug. As such, these data provide preliminary evidence for a high level of potency for RNAi therapeutics in humans with the improved pharmacologic properties for our ESC-GalNAc conjugate delivery technology. As supported by data we presented earlier this year, this improved potency appears to be due to the increased stabilization chemistry employed with our ESC platform, as well as an attenuated nuclease environment in human cells," said Akshay Vaishnaw, M.D., Ph.D., Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer of Alnylam. "In addition, ALN-AT3 effects were found to be quite durable, lasting for months after a single dose. Accordingly, we will aim to evaluate a once-monthly dosing regimen in further clinical studies, as we believe this could provide a highly attractive prophylactic regimen for patients. We look forward to the continued dose escalation in this Phase 1 study and expect to present complete results in mid-2015.”
By my count, there are at least four (4) separate phase 1 human clinical trials currently being conducted by ALNY utilizing its GalNAc-ESC chemistry (ALN-AT3, ALN-PCSsc, ALN-AS1 & ALN-CC5). It's possible that I missed some. In any case, on 12.08.2014 - Alnylam Reported Positive Initial Results for ALN-AT3, an Investigational RNAi Therapeutic Targeting Antithrombin (AT) for the Treatment of Hemophilia and Rare Bleeding Disorders, from Ongoing Phase 1 Trial.
ALNY's 12-8-2014 press release stated, in part, the following:
“These initial results show preliminary evidence for potency and durability of RNAi therapeutics at mcg/kg subcutaneous doses in human studies, and are the first clinical data to be reported for Alnylam's Enhanced Stabilization Chemistry (ESC)-GalNAc conjugate technology.”
“Subcutaneous Dose Administration of ALN-AT3 Found to be Well Tolerated in Healthy Volunteers and Initial Cohorts of Hemophilia Subjects.”
(Cont. in next post)
(Cont. from prior post)
4. end2war wrote, "There is a positive side to this for ARWR, but it is more troubling to me than positive as it shows ALNY's delivery system working well, and sets a high standard of comparison for AD."
---end2war's assessment of the situation seems pretty close to the mark to me. The reality is that ARWR's likelihood of success is not materially bolstered by ALNY's success with ALN-CC5. To assert otherwise is simply wishful thinking. Obviously, ARWR's DPC technology uses a different chemistry than that used in ALN-CC5 so the success of ALNY won't convince too many ARWR non-believers to change their opinion. Anyone who thinks RNAi has suddenly arrived and has now been blessed as viable, etc., because of ALN-CC5's success is simply not going to then say "the takeaway is ARWR is the beneficiary--Buy ARWR". You have to already have concluded that ARWR's DPC is viable in terms of its safety and efficacy profile. How does ALN-CC5's success acrue in some tangible way to the benefit of ARWR's DPC?
---If ALN-CC5 had failed, wouldn't that have been seen by Wall Street as a boon to ARWR? If true, the opposite is almost certainly true.