First of all.. I don't normally post on this message board:).. fwiw.. I purchased shares before the latest capital raise.. then I felt shares in the 1.19 were a good deal.. and then I also bought shares at around .60 and .70 and then more at a dollar.. then more at a dollar and change..
I would encourage people to continue reading this thread because there were some good responses.. (below).. good luck to you too.
mike.. thanks for responding..
but that is what is "confusing" (to me)..
making a "broad over-generalization" doesn't help his readers to distinguish between all the preclinical/phase one trials out there right now and what I believe to be the "sweet spot" we find ourselves in..
by no means do I think we have been totally dersisked.. however, at this point I think NVIV deserves a little more than a 20 percent possiblity of success..
I would be interested to know what you think our "odds for success" are?
Thanks for the reply junkdna..
I understand the results will need to be replicated (by patient 2, 3 etc.) but it seems to me that the safety part is almost a slam dunk (at this point).. so to give only a 20 percent chance of success knowing what we know today seems awfully low..
Personally I would have to give (just based on what I know and gut feeling) that we have AT LEAST more than a 50 percent chance of showing SOME benefit to patients.. *knowing what we know today at least some efficacy seems very probable...
IF there are no REAL alternatives for this type of injury.. then I would think the "benefit" hurdle wouldn't be as high compared to competing with an existing treatment (another reason I am optimistic that NVIV has something of REAL VALUE right now.
If people disagree with my thinking/logic.. please respond..
again, how can Jason (a bull) realistically put such a low chance of success knowing what we know TODAY. Thanks.
I have been a shareholder who has followed this company for about a year now. I would be stating the obvious to say that today's news was incredible.. and I am glad to own a significant amount of shares (for me).. I understand Jason Napodano (the one who wrote the bullish zacks article) believes that even with the given risk he believes we should be trading at over 3 dollars.
What I need some help with is how does Jason come up with a 20 percent success probability knowing everything we know at this point? I know we are only one patient into the phase 1 and we have a ways to go in order to commercialize the scaffold.. however, my gut tells me that this investment has been de risked in a MAJOR way at this point.
Just looking at the preclinical data, the fda allowing NVIV to speed up recruitment and now early indications of efficacy (and this is without stem cells!).. I would just like somebody to help me put the 20 percent comment in context..
It seems to me that potential side effects are very unlikely with a scaffold that eventually disolves in the body.. and IF the scaffold shows even SOME benefit for the patient because of the lack of alternatives.. it would would be very likely approved.
Thanks in advance for reading this question.. and hopefully somebody can shed a light on how Jason could come up with such a number.