In looking at your posts across this thread, you have confirmed you are nothing more than a liar and basher with the motive to try to get folks to sell so you can buy in cheap. If your are not truly trying to get anyone to sell here as you claim in your original statement then saying you do not have a bashing agenda, then why would you later assert may consider getting involved at a cheaper level? You must think the message board readers here are really stupid. In reality the only garbage I have seen of late is your pathetic dishonest posts.
"I am not trying to get anyone to sell here but I am tired of hearing market manipulation for funds to buy and market cap to low compared to ADRO."
"I don't have a bashing motive and once again as I just said to another close minded individual. Good bye and good luck. No more help from me."
"If stock gets cheap enough I may reconsider getting involved but at current levels its not cheap based on a biotech correction in the overall market that we just went thru for past 5 years."
Thanks Chinaman, you as well, I always appreciate your perspective. And clearly it appears you have made some good financial and career decisions in your life considering your global summer vacationing and golf outings. Hopefully, we will all be able to look back and be very pleased with our decision to invest in ADXS.
Agreed Chinaman, great things to come, cannot wait to see the upcoming data. It just burns me up when folks second management decisions on a message board (ok, just sometimes).
James, agree with you on that, it's all relative at the end of the day. Still I think evaluation of the decision made, as an investors, are important. We don't make the decisions to run the company, but investors generally speaking finance the company. I remember in 2013 speaking to Dan and he alluded to a "$50 stock price" in a couple years. Well we are currently at $15. Again, it's all relative, I'm grateful to be at $15 rather than $3, but it's also relevant for us to make sense of and scrutinize decisions made that may have prevented us for beiAg at $50 now.
Agree on one hand, but for those of us who have been here a while, the negative sentiment surrounding the current deal also raises the legitimate question of whether ADXS has a CEO who is too slick for his own good and now not afraid to even shortcut and discount (not just us small insignificant pre-RS shareholders) but also large investors who have 20% ownership stakes in the company. The jury is still out, but at times I wonder if DO has a tendency to "bite the hand that feeds him."
You're right on Dan's position and hopefully it will turn out well, but it still begs the question is Dan cycling through shareholders to his own benefit (his offering at $3 came after his offering at $4 and the reason for his $3 offering was to push through a proxy that largely benefiting management RSU grants going through even though his discounted the $3 offering by 40 percent from what the stock traded at the week before). Again, I'm just posing the question, is he now getting more bold (at the time of the $3 offering he largely offended pre-RS smaller sharholders) now targeting larger shareholder like Adage who saw a siginifiant haircut to when they last bought at 19. And we know Adage wasn't included in this recent deal and had to buy shares on the open market to make sure their % ownership stayed the same given the dilution of this last deal. Meanwhile, time actually plays to management's favor in that as they dilute current shareholders they can engineering themselves beneficially by additional options, etc. I'm just raising the question, because the trading of the stock up to this deal raises questions (not just speculative questions considering an entity that just gave ADXS 20m in cheap shares previously sold out their entire position when the stock topped out less then three months ago).
James, come on, you honestly don't think they contributed to the intense pressure down on our stock? To me the real question is why wasn't ADXS involved in this deal? If DO taking the view that he wants to add additional large investors at the expense of existing shareholders? Adage and other bought in at 19, then all of the sudden we have an investor in a new offering buy in at 14 that previously sold 150k shares at the top. I agree with your earlier comment that there's a lot we don't know above our pay grade, but I wouldn't necessarily be to happy if I were Adage or any of the other sharholders who bought at 19 to see ADXS dilute current shareholder with a big investor who mysteriously sold in the high 20s then was willing to buy a much larger stake at 14 (it's naïve for any of us to think this shareholder didn't contribute to the pressure on our stock). Its gets to the question does DO see current shareholders as expendable until the next batch even if he sets the opportunity for the next batch to dilute current shareholders at a better deal.
My point is that is it not reasonable to question whether DO is contributing to the massive manipulation of ADXS shares seeing the stock trade down 50% in the last three months, culminating with an investor who previously had 150k shares and sold at the top all of the sudden gave ADXS 20 million in exchange for shares at 50% of the value when the allegedly sold and now doubled down on their original position by a factor of 8x.
Adxs228, thanks for sharing this information. Your post adds clarity to what has transpired with this recent deal. The fact Sectoral held 150k shares previously and sold last quarter, but now bought into this new offering at 13.91 reveals an incredible amount of information regarding why the stock traded down from 30 to 14. Sectoral recently bought at 13.91 however they sold their previous position sometime during the time the stock traded up to 30. If this in not the smoking gun explaining why the stock traded down from 30 to 14, I don't know what is. Here we have an investor originally with 150k shares that sold at the top, then since then revealed they have significant dry power to buy 1.4 million shares at 14. What happened between 30 and 14? They likely used that dry powder to short it down to 14 before rebuying at more than 8x their original position. During this time the terms of this recent "deal" were being hammered out. Sectoral was apparently willing to giving ADXS 20million in a dilutive offering, but not before they flipped their original 150k position and shorted the stock down 50% before rebuying 8x times their original investment. Adds more validity in my recent questions whether the structure of this recent deal (dilutive rather than upfront cash) contributed to the recent pressure on the stock. I'm curious whether others thinks I am offbase things Sectoral was a major force in the recent 50% dive in ADXS shares.
Interesting, not sure how these regional/country deals are structured, it sounds like you're saying a BP deal could still be structured for worldwide rights for the combo of ADXS/Keytruda. That would be encouraging and make these smaller country deals seem more reasonable.
James, that does appear to be the rationale. Hopefully it works out. It does make one wonder though given that the financial terms of these smaller deals are lackluster how ADXS will be able to jump to a large deal for its core markets with a BP. I assume DO is counting on strong results for the combo trials that will give him more leverage. That's understandable, but one could also ask if that's the case why even do these smaller deals if waiting say six months from now additional trial data would enable DO to land a big BP deal for worldwide rights.
Rvga, I'm not following your first question when you say "Give shares of about $25 Million worth at under $14 dollars or split with BP and give away chunks of profits?" With this deal ADXS has given away the majority of Canadian profits to our partners (we get double digits royalties, which is likely typically 10-15%). The deal also did not involve any straight-out upfront cash (the $25 million we received was from a dilutive capital raise, $20 million of which was from an investment firm and not the parmacuetical firm in the deal). Typically, a deal with BP such as Aduro's would involve similar royalties on sales (with Aduro collecting likely 10-15%) The big difference is that in real, material deal Aduro receives upfront non-dilutive cash payment in the tens of millions and potential milestone payments totaling in the hundreds of millions. Our total milestone payments in this deal is up to $30 million as I recall (granted this deal is different and smaller in scale naturally because it only involves one country, but I think what investors can't get their arms around is why would ADXS give away the majority of Canadian profits for its key constructs any not command any non-dilutive payment upfront and only a total of $30 million in potential milestone payments.
Yi, I think you're underestimating how quickly a stock like ADXS can move up. We recently moved up to $30 on revelation that some well-known institutional investors took a position in ADXS, which is not really news per se. Sometime in the next 12 months we could actually start to see revenues from 1) Aratana veterinary construct licensing dead, and/or 2) Biocon cervical cancer licensing deal in India. At that point, we go from a clinical stage company to one that produces revenue alongside the full clinical pipeline that is currently advancing. Don't underestimate the potential market reaction and new investor interest in us when that happens.
Catt, manufacturing is a different than distribution. It looks like ADXS is setting up manufacturing near-term to be able to supply the vaccine to Biocon, etc. However, with distribution you are talking about an army of pharmceutical sales reps calling on doctors, etc. That's where its hard to beat the infrastructure and market clout BP has.
I think the plan all along is to license to BP in a big deal for the US. I don't think ADXS is equipped with the distribution capabilities to do it by themselves, that's where BP comes in with their network and distribution infrastructure.
Yi good points. Agree that shareholders need to understand and confirm that decisions made are in their interests. In the case of the current deal, it's unclear. There may be reasons it was done that make sense that I don't recognize, but it does bother me the only cash involved was another dilutive offering that coincidently (?) happened after the stock was pressured down more than 50% from just a few months ago.
Barney, I hope you're right and don't plan on selling anytime soon. Good points, Mp. That seems reasonable and if that is DO's intent then the deal would appear much more of a strategic and shrewd move that could be very beneficial to shareholder value by way of paving the way for a bigger BP deal. Hope that's the case.
Wasbill, my guess is I have a much larger position in ADXS than you. so no I'm not trying to bash. I'm just trying to better understand what appears in some respects a questionable deal. I care very much about the decisions made, for better or worse, because this is far and away my largest investment. Regarding your comments about the deal being at a premium to the prior day and that the market has priced ADXS as it is and that is beyond management, you're missing my point. All I'm saying is I don't think it's farfetched to wonder if part of the reason it experienced heavy pressure from 30 to 14 (besides the boarder market and biotech correction) was related to the structure of this deal - with the only cash involved being dilutive capital raise and seeing 25 million was involved the particpants had a vested interest to get the stock down as much as possible during the negoations before the deal closed.
Tina, I think one of the challenges at stake is that small companies like ADXS need cash, so on one hand it is good to raise cash. The grey area that is difficult to recognize is when a CEO simply views cash coming into the company, regardless of the implications, as a positive. This is what I question. It's likely DO is in part is compensated for bringing money to the company, but the tone of the PR implies DO believes this "deal" has monetized the Canadian market whereas arguably the monetary benefits fall more to Sectoral and Knight than ADXS shareholders. It boils down to the signal and precedent set in DO's deal-making strategy. If he thinks this deal was done on "favorable" terms even though it involves no non-dilutive payment (at least upfront) to ADXS shareholders, will DO jump in head first to the first offer from BP giving away core rights for any type of non-dilutive payment, say for $5 million and all-in milestone payments of $50 million. That would be a step forward from the current deal-making strategy, but arguably not going to get us to a multi-billion valuation. My question is whether DO is caught up in entities catering to him for cheap shares, whether he is really sending the signal that when BP comes to the negotiating table he is truly prepared to add value to the company or instead jump at the first offer, however small, of any kind of non-dilutive deal. I'm all for holding out for a big deal, but the deals to date appear that DO is willing to jump at any offer no matter the impact to sharehoders.