Fri, Aug 22, 2014, 1:32 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 7 hrs 58 mins


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Ohr Pharmaceutical, Inc. Message Board

hugeman99 8 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 29, 2014 7:20 PM Member since: Jan 21, 1998
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • hugeman99 hugeman99 Jul 29, 2014 7:20 PM Flag

    Which Opti are you talking about, the complete jerk who insulted and drove skeptics off the board with regularity on the way up, or the jaded and bitter one who insulted anyone who had a shred of optimism ahead of the data?

    They both took a bath in this stock.

  • hugeman99 hugeman99 Jul 29, 2014 7:08 PM Flag

    Hey Richmando.....

    Blow it out your #$%$! What's your problem, you take a m#$%$ive loss on OHRP like that other clown Optimist_77?

    Don't #$%$ociate me with Livermore_10 or anybody else. I was never a lemming of his, but if my memory serves me well, you drank your share of his Kool-Aid. I met him at the shareholder meeting, he was real AND he was a fallible human.

    Before the pain of your financial loss causes you to make any more inaccurate accusations about me, YOU SHOULD READ ALL OF MY POSTS on OHRP board, you'll need to go back to the middle of 2013.

    After that, if for some emotional reason you want to engage in a tit-for-tat argument, have at it.

    Tell me where my credibility is in question, site my specific posts and I'll defend myself.

    Until you do that, you are just another guy who made bad trading decisions and wants to blame it on somebody else, just like Optimist_77.

    Livermore_10's cost basis on his 80K+ shares of OHRP was somewhere around $2.70 post reverse-split, #$%$uming from his month plus absence on his private board that he has liquidated, he had a triple, and a $400K profit. My profit's were only a fraction of that, but they DEFINITELY were nice profits. I never told anyone to buy this stock.

    Who lost more money on OHRP, You or Optimist_77? Or are you still setting on a big money losing position hoping for that one day pop that lets you exit with a little bit less of a loss?

    When it comes to trading/investing, hope is NOT a viable strategy.

    Nobody forced you to press the 'Buy' button, #$%$, NOBODY!

    p.s. I'm not a StuartCreekFarms lemming either. But if anybody on this board was credible, it was him. Knowledgeable, level headed and well reasoned.

  • Hey Stuart, AAVL IPO coming this week, any thoughts?

    Gene therapy for eye diseases.

    Adage Capital who were PBYI investors are AAVL investors too.

  • Reply to

    was the p-value really .18 like adam says

    by charles_lacy2003 Jun 24, 2014 1:41 PM
    hugeman99 hugeman99 Jun 24, 2014 2:12 PM Flag

    charles, now you are stuck in that dog LPTN and OHRP (remember, you told us you were long OHRP as a hedge).

    Maybe Pancoast will take you in a ride in his Lamborgini after the LPTN shareholder meeting this week. After all, you and the other LPTN shareholders bought it for him. Zoom, zoom!

    Still waiting to see who buys that iSONEP option from PFE, when was that supposed to happen, April? Can you ask Pancoast about that for me? Thanks!

  • Reply to

    Dr. Slakter was very good on CC

    by stuartcreekfarms Jun 24, 2014 9:25 AM
    hugeman99 hugeman99 Jun 24, 2014 12:19 PM Flag

    Correct me if I'm wrong, there was no statistical significance to the visual acuity differences? How often do we actually see statistical significance even in PhII small sample that disappears when we have 300+ patients as will be required in PhIII? And since squalamine didn't decrease lesion size as the calmodulin binding theory suggested, we don't really know what it's doing in there, do we? Help me understand, how do we get visual acuity improvements without reducing lesion size? Couldn't the acuity difference seen thus far end up being just a statistical anomoly? As a lay person I have no way of putting into perspective how significant an improvement of 10.4 letters vs 6.3 letters is or how credible the idea of improved visual acuity without reducing lesion size is.

    On the conference call, Slakter even had to beg off on how/why squalamine improved visual acuity since it didn't reduce injections, the primary endpoint. To quote Slakter 'It APPEARS squalamine is exerting it's effect in a more basic level, at the pathophysiology of the disease, at the neovascular tissue, at fibrosis and inflamation that MIGHT be associated with it.' I'd feel a lot better about squalamine if Slakter said WE KNOW that squalmine is improving visual acuity because it...... ('It appears' and 'might' don't give me a lot of confidence we know just what is going on).

    Also on the call Slakter made it clear there is no provision or plan to tweek the retreatment criteria in the current trial and no plan to start a PhIII trial until PhII is complete. Thus any trial with more favorable retreatment criteria is going to need to go through the entire FDA process. That's going to take another two years.

    Maybe a big pharma will be willing to throw some seed money at OHRP to keep them going, but for now we have significant cash burn from the current trial AS WELL AS FUNDING SKS and it's early stage trials before we ever see if the visual improvements are actually real.

  • hugeman99 hugeman99 Jun 24, 2014 12:14 PM Flag

    In case I wasn't clear, Adam story just hit thestreetdotcom

  • Remember back on April 25th when Opimist_77 was in full rant mode he babbled on about how he had researched 12 biotech stocks that had announced PhII interim or final data and that all of them we up 30-50% in the 60 days leading into the announcement.

    He never did disclose the names, but nobody ever expected it.

    Our resident know-it-all asserts that 'price is everything'. The market knows all! If the price isn't rising, RESULTS WILL BE BAD! Some woman said it on Wall $treet Week 15 years ago, so it MUST be flawlessly true.

    Somewhere in the thread that followed, Mr. Know-it-all challenged us to find one biotech stock that had fallen ahead of positive PhII results.

    By chance, over the weekend I was doing a little historical due diligence (something that seems to challenge wonderboy) and took a look at the price action of a small, relatively unknown biotech that was doing a trial in the wet AMD space a while back. Maybe you've heard of the company, it's called REGENERON. Symbol is REGN, just in case Optimist hasn't run across them in his extensive due diligence. REGN had zero product revenue and was burning $20MM cash per qtr.

    On March 27, 2007 (a Tuesday morning a week after options expiration), REGN announced positive Interim PhII results for an obscure drug they called VEGF-Trap (you might be familiar with it's new name, they call it Eylea).

    So how did REGN stock perform for the 30 & 60 days ahead of PhII interim results? It HAD to be up 50% if you believe douchebagg_77, right? Nope, that wasn't quite the case. For 30 days prior to results REGN was DOWN 9%, for 60 days ahead of results it was DOWN 4%. The stock was actually DOWN 23% from it's high a few months prior.

    Amount I can lose on my OHRP investment?.................................. Zero, I'm riding house money.
    Value I gain making fun of Jerkwadd_77 who has lost a boatload on OHRP? .............. Priceless!

8.13-0.08(-0.97%)Aug 21 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.