Recent

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

NQ Mobile Inc. Message Board

mylkvveed 96 posts  |  Last Activity: Aug 31, 2015 12:32 PM Member since: Jan 6, 2007
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    +30% today on triple+ volume.

    by tampico1200 Aug 31, 2015 11:55 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 31, 2015 12:32 PM Flag

    Pump & Dump

  • Reply to

    Dr M

    by cozyclinton Aug 28, 2015 10:32 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 28, 2015 12:52 PM Flag

    Unfortunately it doesn't change the fact HART has walked away from what ever success his work accomplished after trialing it on large animals themselves and are now starting from scratch with new tubes and new stem cells. So maybe it wasn't Dr. Macchiarini overselling his work but HART management over selling it. The result is the same, we went from "proof of concept" to hopeful experimentation (while they rapidly run out of cash).

    I'm quite confident that if the results of the large animal trial that was ended due to "swelling on the scaffold" were any where close to the description of results of the compassionate care cases or just some level of regeneration of the trachea, LaFrancesca could have answered my question about whether they could grow tissue in the affirmative. They would also still be working toward clinical trials for their trachea product and would still be in or just finished large animal trials (as investors were lead to believe before the last cc) and they wouldn't have needed to remove their investor presentation dedicated to progress and opportunity of their trachea product.

  • Reply to

    Mulligan is Complete

    by mylkvveed Aug 26, 2015 9:27 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 27, 2015 9:07 PM Flag

    ****************************************************************
    McGorry was one of them. When they couldn't get a real CEO to take the job they went to their fallback position tapping McGorry from their board.

  • mylkvveed by mylkvveed Aug 26, 2015 9:27 AM Flag

    They finally removed the investor presentation from their website. Now if someone asks pesky questions about claims they made in the past they don't have to worry about their own web site conflicting with their denials.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 6:54 PM Flag

    Up until about a week ago it was a trachea then it became a "trachea substitute". Or tube. Last I checked their investor presentation had lots of information on the economics of selling regenerated tracheas. Maybe they should update it with the economics of selling improved tubes. Then again maybe there is a reason they haven't updated this yet.

  • Reply to

    mylk te-st

    by cozyclinton Aug 25, 2015 1:38 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 6:46 PM Flag

    If you are not familiar with CAPS it's along term stock picking competition that goes back to 2006. It's a little different than a typical portfolio competition in that your rank is a combination of accuracy and score with your score reflecting how much better or worse your pick did as compared to the S&P 500 over the same time frame.

    There is a blog component to the site but what I think you would find interesting is the pitches for the stocks that zzlangerhans recs as well as some of the people who follow him and post on his pitches. He get's into both the science and the financials and has an excellent long term track record. Most of his discussion is over my head however you would probably be able to follow it. I just follow him out of curiousity.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 5:57 PM Flag

    O.K now that I have proof of concept for copy pasting Yahoo m.b. quotes here we go for real:

    insyderguy007 said:

    I made no assertions about immunosuppression.

    I absolutely believe that insurance companies will be willing to pay for a device that requires no immunosuppression, no frequent replacement, and less complications over time.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 5:56 PM Flag

    I made no assertions about immunosuppression.

    I absolutely believe that insurance companies will be willing to pay for a device that requires no immunosuppression, no frequent replacement, and less complications over time.

  • Reply to

    mylk te-st

    by cozyclinton Aug 25, 2015 1:38 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 4:53 PM Flag

    HART was a one off attempt at profiting from biotech cozy. I thought having successfully regenerated tracheas in 7 compassionate care cases would save me the need to worry about getting too deep in the science. Lesson learned. I haven't responded to suggestions for alternate biotech plays because I don't have the time to try to get up to speed and probably couldn't learn enough to ever get past the little bit of knowledge is dangerous level.

    I've got resource you might be interested in though. I'm active in The Motely Fools stock picking competition CAPS. I copied and pasted the bio of a biotech guru there with an outstanding long term public record that you might find interesting. I know there is a little club of like minds so if you look him up you'll likely find others as well.

    zzlangerhans says:
    Emergency room physician, former Harvard magna cum laude in biochemistry, Howard Hughes research fellow, NRSA fellowship recipient and xenotransplantation postdoctoral fellow

    Although HART hasn't helped either my real life or CAPS portfolio I also have a solid long term public CAPS track record under the alias "MKArch". ~99.75 percentile rank.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 2:43 PM Flag

    According to one of the complaints asserted against Dr. M in regard to a compassionate care case, the patient required a procedure to clean out her airway every 4 hours. I seriously doubt they have a set it and forget it solution to trachea replacement. In fact according to their own disclosure they have no solution and are only experimenting with different materials and geometries. Unless you have some non public documentation on the second generation tube, I fail to see where your assertions about immunosuppression and replacement is coming from.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 10:37 AM Flag

    You may well be correct and they may well have a superior tube that they could sell but what are the economics of superior tube sales? They provided the economics for regenerated tracheas including discussions with insurance companies to make sure they would get what they projected.

    Per one of their early cc's the value in a regenerated trachea is that the body does not reject it. In traditional treatment a tube is inserted that is certain to be rejected by the body and a constant supply of immunosuppressant's is administered in a losing battle to stave off rejection of the tube. This is where the near certain death sentence and months of survival prognosis of traditional treatment comes from.

    Even at $100K per procedure their trachea product was supposed to be less costly than months of fighting a losing battle to stave off rejection of the tube. If all they have is a tube that will post pone rejection a little longer than the current tube what will insurance companies be willing to pay for that? this is assuming it ever even gets FDA approval.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 9:46 AM Flag

    When I asked if they could grow tissue the response wasn't "Yes but it's undifferentiated" the response was essentially no. The confirmation of "neovascularization" later in the call suggest "maybe" tissue at a microscopic level.

    So far here is the evolution of their product:

    We've regenerated tracheas in 7 compassionate care cases.

    We've regenerated tracheas in 5 compassionate care cases.

    We're in a large animal pre-clinical trial to get our trachea product for which we already have proof of concept via the compassionate care cases into clinical trials.

    We discovered some swelling on the scaffold near the end of the large animal trial that is going to cause a 2-6 month delay in our time line to FDA approval. However we are confident we know what the problem is and have a solution.

    We needed to start over with new animals and won't know for sure if the swelling fix is successful until the trials are complete which takes 6 month. At this point our time line to FDA approval has not changed (where did the 2 month sin the 2-6 month delay ever come in?)

    6 months after they announced they needed an additional 2-6 months due to swelling on the scaffold during their large animal trial we learn they are not even in large animal trials and even worse they are starting over perfecting tubes and don't even know what organ they may eventually want to bring to clinical trials let alone when they might be ready to do this.

    Oh did I mention they're going to run out of cash in about a year?

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 8:38 AM Flag

    BTW, also on the investor presentation is information about expected compensation for their "regenerated trachea" of ~$100K per procedure and a potential market of ~7K procedures per year between the U.S. and E.U. That would amount to hundreds of millions a year in revenue and given the product would be high gross margin and the noted they don't need a lot of marketing because the procedures would only be done at a handful of hospitals across the country a large portion of that fee would fall to the bottom line. If they goal has been shifted to marketing a better plastic tube, how much compensation do you think they can expect?

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 25, 2015 8:29 AM Flag

    Over the last week or so the "GOAL" has been kneecapped to perfecting the tube, however, prior to the conference call investors were told they had already regenerated tracheas in 5 adults in compassionate care cases and were supposedly in the process of regenerating a trachea in one or more large animals in pre-clinical trials to get their "REGENERATED TRACHEA" product into clinical trials. They referred to the 5 compassionate care cases as "proof of concept" that they had actually succeeded in regenerating tracheas only in non clinical trial settings.

    You might also want to take a look at the "Investor Presentation" in the Investor Relations section of their web site where they have a bronchoscopy noted as coutesy of Dr. Mark Holterman that is said to be 6 weeks post operation. Next to the bronchoscopy they have diagrams depicting cells embedded in the scaffold and then a section of regenerated tissue noting an epithelium layer. IE: according to the own presentation not only have they regenerated tissue in a trachea it's differentiated tissue. When I brought this up on the call they acted like I was imagining this. McGorry said something about not relying on images on a cell phone. For the record I use a p.c. with full size screen. I was also cut off mid sentence when I pushed this topic and was in the que to ask more questions when management announced there were no more questions and the call was ended.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying...HART

    by insyderguy007 Aug 24, 2015 10:20 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 24, 2015 10:48 PM Flag

    You might want to re-listen to the part of the cc where I asked LaFrancesca point blank can you grow tissue and he couldn't answer yes. BTW going in to the cc, they were supposed to be near the end of a 6 month large animal study to get a regenerated trachea product into clinical trials in early 2016. Instead investors were informed they have hopes to do large animal studies some day and they don't know what organ they may eventually look to get into clinical trials. All while they rapidly run out of cash. This might have something to do with the reason management was buying shares the other day at less than half of what they were buying shares for just a few months ago.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying - new form 4's CEO and CFO

    by jathman Aug 23, 2015 9:15 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 24, 2015 6:54 PM Flag

    "Proping up the stock price doesnt reduce or forestall dilution?"
    *****************************************************

    In and of itself no. The stock could go to $1M/ share and HART will still run out of cash in about a year. Per my last post a higher share price would make getting a secondary to raise cash more likely.. It would also reduce the cost (dilution) of the equity cash raise. A higher share price by itself however, does not solve their financial problems.

    The type of investors needed to raise additional cash in a secondary are also not likely to be fooled into ignoring the fact they're no longer working on getting into clinical trials because management bought some shares in the open market. Ditto Green getting kicked to the curb because they wanted a CEO with clinical trial experience and getting a special forces commander instead. I guess now that they're no longer working on getting into clinical trials that experience isn't as relevant?

  • Reply to

    Insider buying - new form 4's CEO and CFO

    by jathman Aug 23, 2015 9:15 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 24, 2015 12:15 PM Flag

    They need new money via another secondary so trying to prop the stock price up doesn't directly solve any problems but they probably are hoping propping the stock up will make getting new equity financing easier (possible). They acknowledged the obvious at the end of the last cc that they'll need to raise cash soon and need help.

    As to a moment of insight they were buying on the open market "AFTER" they had already raised cash the last time, so warranted optimism seemed the most plausible explanation. Hind sight 20/20 guilt and pure delusion seem the most plausible explanations next to preventative action to prop the stock up going into the "pull the rug out from under investor feet" conference call and new financing needed shortly afterwards.

  • Reply to

    Insider buying - new form 4's CEO and CFO

    by jathman Aug 23, 2015 9:15 AM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 24, 2015 9:09 AM Flag

    They were buying open market at over twice the price they just paid a few months ago. I took it as confirmation the large animal trial for their trachea product was going well. Instead they reported they're not even in large animal trials, they're back to the drawing board perfecting tubes and don't even know what organ they might eventually want to go into clinical trials with. This is occurring while they are rapidly running out of cash.

  • Reply to

    Nasdaq top 10 gainers list 2 days in a row?

    by johngunn51 Aug 21, 2015 3:56 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 21, 2015 5:18 PM Flag

    I've seen the modest run up preceding the big P&D in the past. My guess is we're watching the guy who going to cash in on an upcoming P&D using the market downturn to load up.

  • Reply to

    In defense of McGorry

    by johngunn51 Aug 19, 2015 7:51 PM
    mylkvveed mylkvveed Aug 20, 2015 1:12 PM Flag

    Without a product reasonably close to clinical trials some time in the next year they will run out of cash with a few mil in death spiral financing being the only real option left on the table. Due to a lack of sufficient funding, they'll have to suspend operations and McGorry will be the entire company and you'll be able to measure the market cap in hundreds of thousands of dollars. Barring a miracle or some serious hedging on what they've actually been able to accomplish, next year you'll have even more blue sky.

NQ
3.87+0.04(+1.04%)Sep 2 4:02 PMEDT