Yes, Dr. Kim and his failed "dwarfing" and invalid sports analogies.
Was he the one who kept saying "get shares under $50 while they last?"
Or was that Dtriever at the INO board?
Ever hear of the military-industrial complex? It PAYS for the U.S. to be involved in wars around the world every year for the rest of eternity.
What we have here is the pharmaceutical-disease-control complex. With few exceptions, it PAYS for big pharma to keep patients on high-priced maintenance drugs instead of a curing them.
It seems to me the best strategy is to enjoy the run-up to data then get out before the data release?
Especially since the date of the data release is KNOWN?
I just wish he would be less vague.
He creates more uncertainty and questions when he does that. Investors DO NOT like uncertainty!
Punit's Tweet from yesterday:
@PunitDhillon: A tough week @Oncosec this week due to unexpected external pressures... But we are not letting down & looking fwd to pushing ahead!
Who follows him on Twitter? What do you make of this confused statement? What "external pressures" is Punit referring to. Does he have a clue?
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.