There are hedge-funds, naked-shorts, and day-traders that have controlled the PPS (Geron), since the FDA imposed their low-level-liver-holds. The Mayo-hold has been released, but the Geron-hold still lingers in endless limbo. In addition, sophisticated computer programs have controlled narrow price channels, that have prevented a PPS breakout to the upside. ASH abstracts, ASH presentations and the good medicine (IMET MF studies) should soon overwhelm their software-computer advantage. This tug-of-war is still going on, but Mayo, led by Dr. T's dual roles, could soon lead us to a significantly higher PPS. I don't believe that Mayo will disappoint us at ASH, since they have already told us that (in some cases) IMET treatment is "Tantamount to a Cure". I believe that means that it is equivalent to a cure, with some reservations (mostly the passage of time has been too short to know for sure).
What does it mean: the same as a cure, as good as a cure, equivalent to a cure, appears to be a cure, tentatively a cure, almost a cure, indistinguishable from a cure? Anyone of these are acceptable, but they are not exactly the same. Also, it does not apply to all cases. Hopefully, the ASH abstracts will start to put this into perspective.
"Tantamount to a Cure" is the battle cry!
It doesn't have anything to do with Mayo Clinic, IMET, ASH, or long term investors. What else is left? (hedge funds, day traders). We will have to wait for the ASH abstracts to continue this discussion. It is a horrible stock, with what appears to be a great cancer drug. How does that play out?
Note the hedge funds reaction to good-IMET-news (for example irishitrader52 imposter, for irishtrader52). The hedge funds, up to now, have been very successful in controlling the PPS. We will soon see if ASH abstracts makes a difference.
It is all coming together. Mayo Clinic will be in the spotlight, for better or worse (better, IMO). The reason for Dr. T's dual roles will become more obvious. The FDA's reason for any continuing holds requires an explanation. The science and medical successes of IMET will be detailed. Others besides Mayo, will talk about IMET potential (NCI, Yale, Amgen and others).
Next Thursday (Nov. 6) is an important date. Mayo has put their reputation on the line. If Imetelstat (IMET) is as good as many of us believe (MF studies), the ASH abstracts will be confirmative. There is a difference between a complete remission and a cure. A cure usually means that once the disease is gone, it is never coming back (and without continuing medication). I am not quite sure what "Equivalent to a Cure" means, but that is certainly better than any of the other possibilities. As far as I can tell, Geron's problems are mostly administrative, and are not on the medical side. Dr. Tefferi has taken dual roles to compensate for any Geron shortcomings, IMO. In the unabridged dictionary tantamount has several meanings that could apply (different shades of gray).
Is (Techsonian) a real news organization? If this is real then the other news services would have it posted. I don't see anything so---Verify before you Trust. Probably a scam.
(From Black)" It's also not clear what Dr. T's dual position motives were. I strongly suspect that there is much more to the story. Again, chippy won't tell us."
I think we pretty much agree, except in the relative importance of Tefferi and Scarlett. As you say, "--there is much more to the story". I think Tefferi is the god-father of IMET, and Scarlett is happy to go along. The FDA's role is a bit foggy. Anyway, we will find out what Mayo has on its mind at ASH.
Black---The only data that matter's is Mayo's MF data, since these involve the only meaningful blood cancer successes in humans to date. Geron, of course, owns IMET, but, I believe, the FDA and Mayo have decided (unofficially) to control the future or IMET. Geron is going along because it is in their interest to do so. Look at Dr. Tefferi's double positions at Mayo and Geron. Mayo and the FDA are on IMET's side, but Geron's interest are more clouded by past history, and investors objectives.
The "ASH-effect" will define exactly what "Tantamount to a Cure" means. Is there evidence that cures exist, or is it too early to tell? What is the difference between a complete remission and a cure?
The domination of the hedge funds is likely over, but their influence will be felt for a while. The greater force will be medical and scientific information from Mayo Clinic (MF studies) and others such as NCI, Amgen, and Yale Medical School.
This is the beginning of the "ASH-effect", that has been predicted to take place between the ASH-abstracts (Nov.6) and the ASH-conference (Dec. 6 to 9). Mayo Clinic has been gathering data and case studies since ASH (2013). The interruption of the low-level-liver-holds (Mayo & Geron) damaged the investment value (Geron PPS), and emboldened hedge-funds (Washington Post article about manipulating small biotech companies). The Mayo-hold has been released by the FDA. ASH (2014) and Mayo's new information, plus new IMET potential, will reverse all of the earlier damage. It is starting now, with the ASH-abstracts on the horizon.
It is the beginning of the "ASH-effect", that has been predicted to take place between the ASH-abstracts (Nov.6) and the ASH-conference (Dec. 6 to 9). Mayo Clinic has been gathering data and case studies since ASH (2013). The interruption of the liver-holds (Mayo & Geron) damaged the investment value (Geron PPS), and emboldened hedge-funds (Washington Post article about manipulating small biotech companies). The Mayo-hold has been released by the FDA. ASH (2014) and Mayo's new information, plus new IMET potential, will reverse all of the earlier damage. It is starting now, with the ASH-abstracts on the horizon.
Is the ASH effect starting? That is--Good news from ASH abstracts creates a higher PPS trend. It is about a week early.
Unless Mayo Clinic is falsifying data from their MF patients, there is no way that this stock can stay down. Geron will be part of an another company before long (merger,buyout, partner) with Mayo Clinic continuing its studies with IMET. The transition news will knock the PPS to a much higher level. Why would Mayo falsify data? (can't come-up with a reason).
We don't know how Mayo and the FDA are resolving Geron's problems without further damaging IMET (from an investor's or patient's point of view). ASH should help with the transparency. Abstracts are next week (Nov. 6).
The next chapter in this tug-of-war between medicine and markets will be written by the ASH abstracts. My belief is that Mayo Clinic has the upper hand. The time between ASH abstracts (Nov. 6) and ASH (Dec. 6 to 9) should be a period of considerable news (hopefully good) about the effectiveness, safety and potential of IMET. The relationships between Mayo and the FDA (hold removed) will become more obvious. I think we discover that they talk to each other and have a "sensible-plan" going forward. Mayo Clinic will be supervising patients and treatments, while the FDA will setting and enforcing the standards (data collection, format).
I agree with you, especially since we are talking about a little more than a week of waiting. I would be totally surprised, if, for any reason, after Nov. 6, we are saying that Mayo has not been creditable, or transparent. Everything that we think we know about the good effects of IMET (in many MF patients) comes directly from Mayo. I don't expect that to change, and I expect additional good news.
The challenge at ASH is to the creditability of Mayo Clinic. Can Mayo prove that Imetelstat (IMET) is every thing they claim that it is? Is it a great drug, that has a special place in medicine (telomere-telomerase plus Nobel Prize)? I think so. Will the PPS reflect that good news? It should, but there is competition from hedge funds (Washington Post article about manipulation of small biotech companies). A good, effective cancer medicine (IMET) should be the dominant factor.
I think the real test is the quality and quantity of Mayo's MF data. ASH will bring new enlightenment and understanding to the MF studies, and there will be consensus that IMET has arrived for "primetime use". I cannot see the FDA standing in IMET's way, with Geron going along with "the program" as designed by the FDA, and supervised by Mayo.
There is general agreement, I believe, that, in no way, have the Mayo's MF results been exaggerated or falsified. The term "abundance of caution" has been used recently, and that applies to the FDA's careful look at Geron.
We agree, I believe, that in no way have the Mayo's MF results been exaggerated or falsified. The term "abundance of caution" has been used recently, and that applies to the FDA's careful look at Geron. I think the real test is the quality and quantity of Mayo's MF data. ASH will bring new enlightenment and understanding to the MF studies, and there will be consensus that IMET has arrived for "primetime use". I cannot see the FDA standing in IMET's way, with Geron going along with "the program" as designed by the FDA, and supervised by Mayo.