I'm long, but this is worth mentioning. I previously experienced this phenomena in TRGT with TC-5214 which looked to be a shoe-in for excellent trial results. BUT the stock actually declined heading into results.
The reason surely is that trial PIs are not required to abide by an oath of silence. Whether through networking or paying for information (arguably unethical but not illegal), institutions will beat retail investigators to the punch in this regard.
This by the way is one reason technical analysis (not my forte) can be useful. If institutions are heading to the exits, or alternatively climbing aboard, T/A can potentially catch that.
Hopefully the alternative happens here, and institutions keep tabs and no SAEs are reported to them. In which case expect the stock to gradually rise.
Downright weird. He's awarded 500,000 shares and then buys a measly 25K on the open market? Given his past, the dude must be loaded.
Unless he's about to buy more ...
One thing is for sure Raven, any analyst setting target over $4 (and I think there is one $6) has an agenda (i.e. the estimate is not factually based). At $4 this is a 1B market cap stock, twice what we were before Daum cut us down last time around. Until this one is out of the woods on SAEs for current trial, forget "to the moon." Even if this trial has no SAEs, approval is still a question mark. Due to the Daum scare, I think the FDA wanted a 30,000 subject trial. This one is what, 8,000 or so?
In other news, GILD keeps chugging along, ah to have focused on CLEAR WINNERS from the start ...
Momentarily anyway. Was watching it because a buddy has a buttload. As seems often the case, going into 11am after good news there was a drop-back, and I picked up a measly 30 "beer money" shares at $291. Good news, looks like it'll buy a few rounds.
Speaking of Earle, I find it interesting (and a positive I think) that he outsourced the current PIII trial to a couple SouthWest US based CROs. So unlike previous trials, DVAX personnel (like Martin formerly and Haywood) will pretty much be on the sidelines, no "investigators" as such to interact with. I think the Earle must have looked back at the conduct of the previous trials and shook his head, "no, a real pharma just pays the dough and dispatches a trial to companies devoted to running trials."
DNDN crushed today, hope you were not heavy in that one, bankroll, good luck.
Ok, got me, you are anything but naive. I have to admit that the individuals out there who would listen to me and trade posts are basement dwellers. They live in their parents basements and are the bottom dweller trolls of message boards. For lack of a better term they are heinous cretins.
Why do you say lupus indication was a long shot compared to asthma?
Who's ignoring it? Did the company statement that all SECONDARY endpoints were met mean all endpoints were met?
No actually he's the night-shift janitor at the King, once again you've demonstrated yourself a naïve pumper extraordinaire, attempting to make an assistant manager out of the night-shift janitor. Amazing stuff. LOL.
We'll see. I have upcoming opportunity to make acquaintance of a high level manager (not exec) at GSK. I'm going to ask him if there was any scuttlebutt on the Eddie Grey departure (i.e. was it perceived he burned bridges, or was it perceived a cordial departure).
Do I detect an attempt to make good news out of a trial + partnership failure, LOL ??!?!?
Indeed, there will be no Caribbean party, the GSK collaboration apparently dead and the AZN asthma program progressing is definitely no gimme. As Raven notes, in a related indication ragweed, DVAX long ago achieved only indeterminate results.
Thus this is looking like a one-trick (or maybe 2) pony.
But if no SAEs and DVAX does not get another thumbs-down led by Daum (and notably seconded independently in Europe), then we have a billion-plus company here, but that's a long slow risk-prone slog from here, as we already are at $380M market cap. The remaining funds are NOT SUFFICIENT to progress beyond a possible approval, some more dilution happens if the company remains independent.
Worth noting, as knowledgable poster JSPoetry noted long ago, there is potential to improve multiple vaccines with TLR7\9. That potential is a long ways out if DVAX remains independent, or easier were a big pharma to acquire.
My actions going forward are predicated on the *assumption* that Heplisav is safe and that we won't suffer any trial-stopping and virtually company-ending SAEs. Thus I'll continue to hold some long and to aggressively "R&R" the rifts in SP.
I think $4 is a reasonable valuation IF Heplisav safe. But there's a long road with risk ahead to get there.
Ok, we'll be looking for a huge surge Monday . . . Uppppppppppp. But where will you be if there's NOT? Will you post back your apology for what proved to be idle juvenile chatter? Will you also promise to try less juvenile in the future? Or will we suffer any number of ill predictions from your palm-o-scope?
Maybe, but you & I have been here the better part of a DECADE and they haven't been bought out yet!
Let's take stock of what you say.
1) It seems you agree with analysts that this is a likely this is a $4+ stock in a year or two. Correct?
2) But you say making money off of 10 cent swings is a dangerous game. Correct?
But if the stock eventually will creep it's way to $4 (your premise #1) and one is playing 10 cent swings long (buy lower, sell higher), then why is this a dangerous game?
Good question: So why the sell off? Surely this was factored into the stock price PRIOR TO the earnings report!
DV1179 did not meet the primary or secondary pharmacodynamic endpoints related to reduction in interferon alpha-regulated genes. .... GlaxoSmithKline will review the data package and determine whether to exercise its option to license DV1179.
I'd GLADLY take 1/2 that, $3, in a buyout. Been with this one so long I'm drained; no longer fancifully looking for the proverbial goldmine.