Yo, naïve rookie. Do you have any clue how pharma deals are structured? I think not. Go do your homework before you pop off and leave us with no doubt of your stupidity. Please ask yourself, why was this a distressed asset in the first place? Part of the answer will be that the royalty burden is too high, which directly impacts margins and the bottom line. Buying low for a distressed asset means something is wrong with the asset. And a 5% royalty for a drug designer is a huge red flag that reduces the value of the asset, hence the low upfront price because margins take a big hit. Now go to LES (licensing executive society), pay the fees to gain access to their reference materials, and do your homework on reasonable royalty for a pharmacophor design. You'll be quizzed later.
In this world you get what you pay for. And value of an asset is inverse to risk. One invests in the asset to mitigate risk. Sometimes things work and risk is mitigated and sometimes things blow up. It's best to fail early, not later. That's why I've been complaining about the stupid press releases, ones that don't show risk mitigation, just that Leo et al. are living in hope of a big market. Hope is not a strategy, Passing milestones is the only way to add value and that is risk mitigation.
Much drug SAR and initial structure development is done now through "in silico" analysis. Many of the drugs I work with now, in what I do for a living (remember I work in this industry but not for CTIX), were first designed in a pharmacophor through software based on 3D structural fitting into a target. While I'm thrilled Penn gets a royalty (Go Quakers! from a proud alum) Yale is a different university (when I was at Penn we routinely beat Yale in basketball). There a company called Schroedinger (German spelling) that does computer drug design as a service to all who will pay. So what's the point of this? This is how new drugs are designed. Further, a 5% royalty for drug design is out-of whack and well above current market rates, based on the deals I've done and based on my research into market rates. Good for Penn, bad for CTIX.
Folks, As I've posted before, I own long shares (about 25K of them) that were bought in the March-June time frame 2014. I'd like the gain to be long term. I also work in this industry and understand what should be stated as part of an SEC requirement to only disclose to the public material information, as I've seen the downside of too much hype. I'm also old enough to remember an old biotech controversy of a company called Centocor (later acquired by J&J) that has an anti-TNF antibody Remicade (competes with Embrel and Humira) where a famous Wall Street Journal article accused the company of issuing a press release "every time an antibody belches." The stick-up-the-rear-end response from the company was that antibodies don't belch. CTIX reminds me of that old story.
I was so happy last week. Leo kept his fat yap shut and the share price slowly crept up. But all good things must come to an end. We have yet another non-material hype press release that does not show any value to an asset and the stock price responds according, that is, it goes down. When will the message get into Leo's thick skull that he needs to walk softly and shut up, particularly when he doesn't have anything material to say (like today). This has consistently been my problem with this weak management.
Anyone else loaning their shares at Schwab? It is now paying 11%, while we wait for real news and to hit the cap gains tax rate, not the fake hype stuff Leo keeps spewing out.
I'll answer your question herbie ("If you are so confident about your April Fools Lie, why did you cover. "). When you have a pump and dump stock like this one, it takes longer for the true believers to capitulate, But this was a fast dump from over 4 to $1.65, so I took my profits. Moreover, I wonder what caused the stock price to more than double over 4 with no news of any kind and no substantive news (powerpoint fantasies do not constitute news, or real accomplishment). That means Kirk is now free to manipulate away because it doesn't take much money in a thinly traded stock to drive it up, particularly when Kirk harbours a fantasy that some foolish company will buy this trash. So keep on pump'n herbie. I can use my profits to short more if you can do another pump round before the inevitable dump after April Fools' Day, or perhaps the Ides of March.
Glad to see you back herbie. It seems you want AWOL when the going got tough for the longs. But you need to work on your reading comprehension skills and perhaps get some scientific knowledge regarding the basic chemistry and biology of what this company is trying to do. You seem to be lacking in those skills and knowledge. If all you're doing is accepting powerpoint slides (which your comments reflect), you have no credibility. Nor did you read my post indicating that I successfully completed my short that I first posted and established when the stock blipped up north of 4 (absurd and stupid territory). So play it again, herbie. I've got the need for speed (that is another quickie short money-maker when a worthless stock gets into stupid territory). Better pump it up before April Fools' Day and the debt turns this stock into a pumpkin.
Herbie, your male bovine excrement hyping is needed to shore up the share price of this flea-bitten canine. But, alas, it appears that you're in a quiet period because you're paid by the company to try to manage this message board and you have to keep your yap shut in a quiet period surrounding a financing. So come on back herbie and hype up the stock price so more. I want to play it again, sam, and short it again as the stock dropped more than 50% in short order in the last short round. (Yes that means I covered on Friday, making well north of US$2 per share.)
Tell us, oh wise herbie, what will the Kirk-appointed goons running this hype factory do with $6Mil in new cash while diluting the shareholders close to 50%? Will it invest in a new, and perhaps real business this time? Or will the money be used to simply pay off the debt due on April Fools Day? Or will the money be used for life-support so that the Kirk goons can continue to be paid for 6 months while putting out meaningless fantasy powerpoints? Since the patent troll business was a bust, what's next? Come on herbie, we need some more humour.
Tell us, oh wise herbie, when the quiet period is over and you still get paid for managing the message as a PR hype-meister. And tell Kirk we can agree on one thing this coming March, GO Hoos!.
The debt is due on April Fools Day. How fitting. We have to give TBIO an A for effort, but it still failed. There's nothing else left to sell except more equity to dilute out existing shareholders. This train wreck already has a negative book value. Prior quarters were propped up with asset sales. But not in Q4 and so far none in Q1. All that was left was to hype up the "technology" nonsense and give hope to shareholders that a potential partner was just around the corner. But hope is not a strategy. No potential partners emerged as a real partner and none will because TBIO failed miserably as a patent troll. As a last resort, TBIO will dilute the snot out of their equity to raise cash to try to live one more quarter (Q2) with the present shelf offering, before the inevitable BK. What investor will throw money on a failing company that needs to pay off its debt in one month? The money raised cannot even be used to grow its patent troll business. I doubt Kirk will throw good money after bad. How pathetic is this?
Yo herbie, As hard as you're trying to put lipstick on this pig (I hope you're getting paid upfront and will not be holding the creditor bag in the BK for your PR efforts) the facts are not with you. Neither is the law. That leaves only table-pounding which is what you're doing. As for the law going against you, look up Commil v. Cisco and read the appellate decision. The patent blogs are filled with discussions about this case and what it means, particularly for life science companies. (hint: not good). The issue of TBIO's (or rather Dana Farber's) patent validity is one were there is ample evidence in the records showing claim invalidity. But in order to get a court or PTAB to rule to this effect (or not) will take years. Therefore, for the purpose of evaluating TBIO as an investment it doesn't matter if the patents are judged valid or not, because the cloud of uncertainty of invalidity will hang over them for years.
But time is not on TBIO's side here. TBIO doesn't have years. It has weeks. We're most of the way through Q1 and there's no money left to fund the continuing losses in Q2. No "partners" that pay money have emerged from the fantasy hype of ice cold PCR (multiplexed or not). All we've seen are made up slide decks but no actual deals. The clock is ticking down to insolvency, given burn rates. Once TBIO is insolvent, Dana Farber can take back its patents and TBIO is left with money-losing operations, lots of debt and no more fantasy hype to stick in a powerpoint.
It seems one side effect of excessive Kool-Aide drinking herbie, is a complete disassociation from reality. If you listened to Gannon's description of the Amgen relationship, it is a service deal to test clinical samples for one clinical trial. In the industry, that is referred to as "mouse nuts." That means it is not material in any way, shape or form. It is more meaningless hype with a name-dropping component.
It that all you've got, herbie? That's pathetic. Meanwhile the patent world continues on its radical change rampage, this time the Commil v. Cisco case is all the rage. What it means for simpletons who can only read buzz-words, like herbie, is that TBIO, even if they had valid patents (which they don't), cannot enforce it because the infringing act is done by the user/customer, not the supplier/manufacturer. Therefore, any enforcement would have to be under the inducement statute. And the Commil decision from the Federal Circuit held that under inducement, an opinion of patent invalidity (that is, only a good faith belief) is sufficient to defeat infringement. And the TBIO patents have been reexamined that goes beyond a good faith belief. Accordingly, TBIO has nothing of any interest to anyone, or to put it into language herbie would understand, TBIO doesn't have a pot to P in. What that means is that all of those "potential" partners will never need to pay to become real partners. tick...tick... time is running out as this is not a going concern.
How's the Kool-Aide Herbie? That drivel you posted doesn't describe what this amorphous technology is, just unsubstantiated marketing hype. It has characteristics of hype, filled with adjectives and adverbs rather than active voice sentences with simple subject and verbs.. But don't worry Herbie, all those "potential" partners know what PCR is and what PCR does and that is why they are still laughing hysterically at the stupidity of what TBIO claims. Where are real partners herbie? All we've read about are pure fantasy.
William said: "A rose by another name is still a rose." Here we have multiplex ice cold PCR is still a 15-30 year old PCR process, well known to those of ordinary skill in the art (to use patent-ese). There's nothing here folks, time to move on.
I'll answer your question ("How do YOU KNOW WHAT MULTIPLEX COLD PCR IS. ") herbie. Answer: I can read. I know what PCR is and the known modifications to the standard PCR process (that is 30 years old). So what's new? The name, that's it. The multiplex aspect of it has been known since the Baylor invention over 20 years ago how to multiplex. The "cold" aspect of it is that mismatches from mutations have a lower melting temperature, also a known phenomena. Any "potential" partner knows this too. That is why partners are a fantasy. And wait until the Goodlatte bill passes Congress and gets signed into law. Check that out herbie. That one means Kirk's money is on the hook when TBIO loses trying to enforce its bogus patents against potential partners who never become real partners. Even Kirk is smart enough to know to not throw good money after bad. What a train wreck! Short's looking good herbie.
There's no "new" problem here, just the same-old, same-old one. There's no there, there. It is not only cash that is needed it is an actual product asset. Oh, you might disagree with some amorphous "technology" that is nothing more than very old PCR methodology with a meaningless tradename. But the same old same old story is still being told of "potential" partners just about to come out of the woodwork to spend big bucks to gain access to this allegedly valuable technology. Great story herbie, but it is a fantasy because no such "real" partners have come forward. You're running out of stupid investors who are still solvent.
Sale of the company? To whom? "There's no there, there." (Gertrude Stein). If you bought in the run up, then you can only quote Forrest Gump: "stupid is as stupid does." Thanks for the $4 short.
Yes additional money is needed in the kitty to fund clinical trials. But, as with any company in this sector, don't assume the only "thing" to sell is additional shares of common stock. One of the deals I recently did (for a company I cannot mention, not CTIX), was sell off marketing/development rights in China for up-front bucks and sharing of clinical trial results into a consortium. Moreover, the other company is also adding the product rights to its existing GMP manufacturing infrastructure. So please keep in mind that there are many needs to get a clinical candidate through regulatory approval and it is not just running clinical trials. Keep your eyes on the GMP supply issues.
I'm still holding here, to paraphrase Shakespeare, neither a buyer nor a seller am I. I'm also a time starved and cheap bustard, I don't subscribe to cable tv so I don't watch fox or msnbc and prefer my news sources on the internet, such as the BBC or the CBC without all of that US sensationalist nonsense. So please don't assume everyone is one extreme or the other. Even if the media isn't, I'm in the middle, independent majority.
It's a "technology" in search of "potential" partners. There is no FDA review because there is no product to review. But first, as with any technology, it will need a valid and enforceable patent. There, the deck is stacked against them. There are no products. Good luck playing patent troll.
I indicated that the 8K's don't show this. Go back and re-read the 8K's and I'm correct. You cited a 13D filing which is not where one would expect to see this because 13D's report beneficial ownership. According to the 8K's, Dolfin now has some unregistered shares, not a smart move because they cannot be traded as they are not registered. Yikes.