Recent

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

Ancestry.com Inc. Message Board

meh76_1999 97 posts  |  Last Activity: 11 hours ago Member since: Mar 20, 2012
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    DATA,

    by russ_58 20 hours ago
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 11 hours ago Flag

    The poster title for AAIC already tells us that we'll definitely get data at AAIC, and that those data are great (since any cognitive improvement in Alzheimer's is great compared to the SOC, especially in ADCS-ADL where we already know the 12-wk data is amazing). The only question is whether Anavex will give both a poster and an oral presentation, or just a poster. Either way, the poster title already tells us definitively that we will get both 12-wk raw efficacy data and 12-wk PK/PD analysis (and perhaps a look at some 26-wk data as well).

  • Reply to

    Current 2-73 patent

    by gonnagohyya Jun 22, 2016 10:34 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 23, 2016 11:07 PM Flag

    60 cents factors in the reverse split. Pre-split low was 15 cents.

  • Reply to

    Current 2-73 patent

    by gonnagohyya Jun 22, 2016 10:34 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 23, 2016 5:50 AM Flag

    Stock price was low at 60 cents, not four dollars.

  • Reply to

    D

    by ntc_bada_bing Jun 1, 2016 3:21 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 21, 2016 7:56 PM Flag

    The underwater stuff was part of the deal -- maybe it's drillable at some point, maybe it isn't. What matters is the good McMullen acreage, of which there is plenty.

  • Reply to

    D

    by ntc_bada_bing Jun 1, 2016 3:21 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 21, 2016 7:46 PM Flag

    Thanks for your faith, tro, haha, but I didn't manage my dry powder properly to take advantage of that window, alas! If I have another chance, believe me!

  • Reply to

    Miss Australia ?

    by beachdan1234 Jun 20, 2016 10:48 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 21, 2016 1:07 AM Flag

    Latest posts were status quo -- relative doing well and seeing continued benefit from 2-73. Noted that 'doing well' should not be confused with 'cured'

    Of course a cure is not needed to become new SOC in Alz, especially since the current SOC does not enable patients to 'do well' in ways discernible to caregivers, unlike 2-73

  • meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 21, 2016 1:01 AM Flag

    The later the partnership comes, the more advantageous and lucrative the terms (because the results will be more proven). Just because a partnership has not been struck does not mean that offers have not been put forward and then rejected by Anavex. It obviously suits BPs' interests to fish with low-ball offers and Anavex's interests to hold out for the best possible offer.

  • Reply to

    D

    by ntc_bada_bing Jun 1, 2016 3:21 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 19, 2016 6:04 AM Flag

    I did notice the drop to current prices, yes. I also noticed that past dilution was not the reason for the drop. You may have heard that the price of oil has been a bit on the low side lately? Hard for Sundance to control what the Saudis do. Past dilutions led to shrewd acquisitions that have averaged an excellent return on investment and transformed the company from non-op to op and gotten it a good chunk of choice acreage in McMullen. Unlike many of its peers, Sundance will survive, and since the price of oil will not be $50 or less for eternity, it will eventually thrive as well. As in the past, the new CR will help catalyze that, and I expect to be very happy with my .13 shares in the years to come (missed out on the .05 shares, alas).

  • Reply to

    D

    by ntc_bada_bing Jun 1, 2016 3:21 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 19, 2016 5:50 AM Flag

    Thanks, trollen, glad to hear from you and hope your summer's going well also. The sector doldrums have been rough, but this game ain't for the faint of heart, haha. I still believe Sundance is a winner in the end.

  • meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 15, 2016 11:24 PM Flag

    I think the Hampel quote is my favorite because of his evident surprise at how good the data turned out to be. 2-73 is a shocker, even to those who've seen it all before.

  • meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 7:42 PM Flag

    Actually, could do a full presentation of 38-wk data at CTAD as well, and an interim look at 52-wk data.

  • Reply to

    My take on the Convertible Note

    by repo_man_one Jun 7, 2016 2:18 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 3:58 PM Flag

    He mentioned Anavex but never focused on it, and that was years before the stock had its big run, which was based on good data. Obviously there is always plenty of pumping and bashing when a stock gets moving, and there was that element as well.

  • meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 3:48 PM Flag

    Wouldn't be surprised, given the pattern from the last two scientific conferences where they looked ahead. I doubt they'd give us the full set of 26-week data yet, but they do have it by now, so who knows, maybe. No bigger forum for it than AAIC.

  • Reply to

    My take on the Convertible Note

    by repo_man_one Jun 7, 2016 2:18 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 5:05 AM Flag

    I think around the time of phase 1b data release, first in anticipation of it, and then in response to any signals of efficacy in the psoriasis patients.

  • Reply to

    My take on the Convertible Note

    by repo_man_one Jun 7, 2016 2:18 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 4:59 AM Flag

    I forgot to add that the 2a trial data that lifted Anavex were not even completed data, but interim data, and the rise from the bottom started even before the first release of interim data, just in anticipation of it (from about 15-20 cents at the bottom up to 50 cents or so before the first batch of interim data was released). Since RCPI's phase 1b trial will involve psoriasis patients, whereas the Anavex phase 1 was in healthy volunteers only, I think RCPI may not need to wait until 2a to see a share-price boost due to efficacy signals.

  • Reply to

    My take on the Convertible Note

    by repo_man_one Jun 7, 2016 2:18 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 4:54 AM Flag

    Unfortunately, highly dilutive deals like the one with Maxim are necessary for cash-strapped little bios like RCPI. Maxim was not chosen out of cluelessness, but out of not having other options. Until the company gains more leverage with good trial results funded by the highly dilutive Maxim deal, it will be difficult to find a better option than Maxim.

    On the bright side, I own another little bio, Anavex, that had to go through similarly dilutive deals with Maxim and similar outfits. After a long time in the wilderness, with the share price dropping from about $4-5 to 15-20 cents over the course of 2-3 years (somewhat a la RCPI) and floundering for a few months at the bottom, Anavex nevertheless managed to conduct a Phase I trial with the proceeds and initiate Phase 2a. When the company finally came through last year with some promising 2a trial results in Alzheimer's, the stock skyrocketed over the course of six months from 15-20 cents to about $3.50 (pre-split, 1:4). It fell almost instantly down from the $14.84 post-split top to about a $3 post-split low, and currently sits about $4, but those who were smart enough to sell some on the way up (unlike me) made a boatload, while even those who held are still sitting about 4x above the bottom.

    So even though Maxim (and others like Maxim) caused massive dilution to the stock, it enabled the company to conduct its trials, and thanks to the strong science behind the compound (which I believe goes for anatabine citrate as well), the dilution did not prevent shareholders who averaged down at the lows from either recouping much of their loss from prior years or turning it into profit.

    Anyway, that experience makes Maxim's presence here tolerable to me as a necessary evil to get anatabine citrate where it needs to go. Even massive dilution is not terrible for investors as long as it catalyzes significant growth. That has been the case for Anavex, and I believe it will be for Rock Creek as well.

  • Reply to

    RCPI !!!

    by tgoode318 Jun 13, 2016 5:49 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 4:36 AM Flag

    Dime would work, sure. Fifty cents I'd be very surprised to see in 2016, but I could see a dime happening.

  • Reply to

    The five week data was presented in

    by riaguy Jun 13, 2016 2:47 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 1:41 AM Flag

    Of course it's that big a deal -- AAIC is easily the highest-visibility Alzheimer's event of the year. It's not a coincidence that so many companies submit there.

  • Reply to

    The five week data was presented in

    by riaguy Jun 13, 2016 2:47 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 14, 2016 1:38 AM Flag

    No, the trial was fully enrolled as of September 28 at the latest, so the last patients finished week 12 (wk 17 including Part A) on January 24 at the latest. Week 5 PK/PD analysis took about 2.5 months, so week 12 PK/PD was likely ready around the beginning of April, leaving about a month before the late-breaking AAIC deadline on May 2nd. Obviously from the poster title Anavex decided to submit wk 12 PK/PD analysis to AAIC along with wk 12 efficacy data. The only question remaining is whether we get any 26-wk efficacy data along with it, as per the last two scientific conference presentations.

  • Reply to

    The five week data was presented in

    by riaguy Jun 13, 2016 2:47 PM
    meh76_1999 meh76_1999 Jun 13, 2016 10:46 PM Flag

    May 2nd deadline -- Anavex would not submit to AAIC based on assumptions, nor would AAIC accept.