You can throw those analysts ratings out the window.
ALL of those reports base their price targets on ONCS getting a REAL partner deal, with cash up-front, milestone payments, and product royalties.
NONE of that is possible until 2016 at the earliest, due to the time it will take for the interim P2B combination trial data to be known. Just starting mono therapy trials will NOT get it done. It now takes successful combination trial data to move forward with big pharma.
Those who do not understand this aspect of biotech investing are in for a very slow awakening.
For the benefit of shareholders, it would be wonderful if the company were purchased and the Dhillons out of the picture.
Let's talk business. How is ONCS being managed?
Remember VHS and Betamax? The best science didn't win there, correct?
ALL of these targets are based on ONCS getting a REAL partnership.
Not investigator (University sponsored) trials. I repeat, not investigator sponsored trials.
A REAL partnership (with cash up front, milestone payments, etc.) won't happen until sometime in 2016, at the earliest. And it is solely dependent on successful P2B results. The people who don't get this don't understand how biotech works.
Those price targets are meaningless and swags at best. They've been around for quite awhile. How were they calculated?
What is the time horizon for those targets? It's usually a year. Zacks had one last year at $4. Do you think we'll hit $4 this year? Not a chance in the world.
Great post. Thanks for bringing some real value here.
ONCS is clearly not a pump and dump. The problem is that they've been moving extremely slowly with regard to the P2B trial. Regardless of where the fault lies, the fact remains that we were first told December, then Q1, and finally "sometime" in Q2 as to when enrollment would commence. This is clearly the most important trial in the company's history, and it's come under a microscope, for good reason.
When you set expectations which are consistently not met (or bunch them all in one week, like was done in December), the market cap will not match the potential of the company. And these issues become even more irritating when the CEO tells someone a week ago that "everything is on schedule." Well, what is the schedule? Punit is so incredibly vague about things that it's impossible for an investor to make an informed decision about ONCS. And we all know how markets don't like uncertainty. Have you ever listened to him speak?
Just for example, listen to Punit's last presentation, and the one given by ATHX just this afternoon. I think you'd find the difference stark. And ATHX has no more money than ONCS does. But their management team is world's better.
The problem is not the science. The problem is that the science has yet to be fully unleashed. The beginning of the monotherapy trials is nice, but they won't create immediate and SUSTAINABLE shareholder value. ONCS was at 0.97 for less 5 minutes. Only successful combination trials will lead to REAL partnerships. And by "real" partnerships I mean those with big pharma with cash up front, milestone payments, and other financial incentives. I don't see other catalysts in 2015 which can move the PPS appreciably higher.
ONCS won't be able to get that type of partnership, IMHO, until 2016 at the earliest. So, if your time horizon is sometime next year, I'll think you'll be OK. But the waters may be very choppy until then, IMHO.
This would be a nice addition to his empire and also cheaper than buying ADXS. :)
Great analogy, and I couldn't agree with you more.
Maybe we'll get lucky and Randal Kirk will take notice.
Investors were hoping for a partnership after ASCO last year. Investors were hoping for a partnership in December of last year. Investors will be hoping for a partnership after ASCO this year.
The problem with ONCS is that big pharma will NOT offer a partnership until efficacy with electroporation is proven in a P2 COMBINATION trial. That's what the P2B trial with Keytruda is all about. And that's why it's so important to the company to get it started!
This was originally promised in December, then in Q1, and now "sometime" in Q2. That's why you're seeing the sell-off this week. It has nothing to do with "manipulation." It has everything to do with frustrated investors who are tired of being promised dates only to see them pass with no results.
And when I say PARTNERSHIP, I mean one where there is up-front money paid, milestone payments, and a REGULATORY PATH laid out with a partner. ONCS has NONE of that. But that is the hope. But again, big pharma will not offer this type of deal until the P2B trial is completed later in 2016, or at a minimum, when interim data is available later this year. (IF it is made available.) But there will be NO DATA until the trial is started!!!
Others have told me that I'm thinking too far ahead. But I beg to differ. The market has spoken and is showing how important the P2B trial actually is to the company and to its investors.
Get it going, ONCS!
Yes, a temporary pop only, but at least a pop.
But what else do they really have. No real data releases of note until 2016.
The pivotal P2B trial is the most important in the company's history.
Why wouldn't starting it be a catalyst?
Yes. Enrollment will begin "sometime" in Q2 now.
It was originally scheduled for Q1.
Frankly, I'd love it if ADXS bought them. (Or anyone, for that matter.)
Avtar Dhillon (Punit's rich uncle) has never brought a product to market. Just look at his background. It's all available online. He has been good at dilution and taking advantage of capital markets for his own personal gain, however.
Punit, for his part, is trying. But he suffers from poor communication skills and historically over-promises and under-delivers. He's even done that at a personal level with a few investors on this board. And he also has a history of dilution. Maybe it's built into his DNA.
I sold all of my remaining shares within 45 seconds after Punit mentioned that there would be a delay in enrolling patients for their pivotal P2B combination trial. Without that trial getting on the move, they have very little to offer.
To be honest, I had a strong sense that was coming during the conference call, and already had the trading section of my brokerage account open and ready.
I repeat, the science is great, the management most assuredly is NOT. Please, someone buy this company. Cancer patients can be helped, but not if management moves at a snails pace.
This is a nice floor, but there is not nearly enough volume for "capitulation" in a classic sense.