You have to think of it as positive because we rarely get any information from the company. If it weren't required by law they wouldn't talk to us at all.
Cost efficient is great, results are what is going to sell the platform. Cheaper is good if it works as well or better than the competition and P2 hasn't proved that yet. Data, data, data, not peer review forever. MOVE Dr. Kim.
yep, big pharma is looking at ADXS real close right now and like what the see. Lots more upside there and focused management. The talk is get on board by some of the bigs. I thought we were there last year with the dwarfing and cockiness of Dr. Kim. You never know.
Reality for me is that you have to get to $20 in order to get $40, and that is a long way off in my mind. As we sit here at $3, with an ever increasing patent value, and a growing revenue stream, I would be offering Tokman $10 a share and a "King of Display" title and titles for all the BOD members just to sew all this up. I hope they are much greedier than me and want the moon, if it comes to that.
This board is almost solid Dr. Kim worshipers, so you will not find many good conversations giving both sides a fair view. I seem to be about the same as FDA in my thinking. I have been blasted for our business execution quotes. Good luck, I don't post opinions much any more.
So true sara. These guys are blind when it comes to INO. Focus is the problem, we seem to be playing catch up and all over the place. Data, data, data and partnerships. By the time they figure it out it will be ten more dilutions and still searching.
Where I feel the company is most vulnerable to take over or cheap buyout attempts. All pieces are in place and lasers (the big issue) appears to be behind us. Now that all the work is done and everything is in place the big money will be looking. Great ASM validating what we knew would come and now we are ripe and looking sweet to the big players. Patents have grown substantially in the last year and are worth sooo much more than they show. We are being held down for a good reason, and we have no institutional investment worth talking about. Lord how I wish we had a poison pill.
And shows no respect for our ability to enforce them. Sometimes you gotta punch someone in the face, so to speak, just to get their attention.
NASDAQ sight on Friday showed almost as many institutional declines as buyers. Dr. Kim has to attract some BP validation and support for our platform. Good Post FDA.
Fda, do you know how many times I have brought this very subject up here? You are talking to a herd of Dr. Kim worshipers who can't see the business end this company. The are a nickle and dime crowd that scream, go it alone, more money for us, and miss the big picture. ADXS has a great management team that is doing what we should be doing. We have some of the best talent in the field and they are coming to work for INO because we have something special. We are falling short in the business end by not focusing on our "low hanging fruit" and bringing a plethora of offerings to the market. Without BP support, this road is a dangerous one for a small bio like INO. Constant dilution is not a good thing. NASDAQ
As accurate a post as I have seen here. We had the momentum and launched our low hanging fruit vaccine only to have a P2 less than stellar. Now we take a year and a half off waiting for a Peer Review that will mean little before we start a P3 while the competition races ahead of us on the same cancer getting orphan status. Do you think big pharma isn't looking? Dilution after dilution and we fall behind the competition with lots of cash in our pockets. Go figure. First to market with an approved vaccine seems like they dominate the market even if we eventually get there. Looks to me like Three or Four years before we can compete in the same arena. Poor execution and planing.
I agree bourbon, but i also feel that the number of dilutions in the narrow time frame we have experienced without partnerships is also as big a factor to. The P2 results caused a three week downtrend that cost Dr. Kim 2.5M of his own money just to halt the fall and try to establish a floor. Noble, but temporary. I have all the respect for his Wharton education as there are two in our family and I know their value, but Dr. Kim's execution is leaving me at a loss. I have enjoyed investing in much better run Bio's and thought this one had all the elements I look for, but I have to say at this point, I am concerned about execution and finance.
Well said Alex, I completely agree. Not only that but it pushes out the time frame for going to market. When you are talking in terms of years these costly mistakes get costlier every day, and that is a huge problem. We have given up a lot of our competitive advantage for sure.
Reading this thread and your opinions, I have to say you guys hit it straight on. Last year we had the momentum and Dr. Kim blew it with the verbiage and raised shareholder expectations. I can tell you that big pharma and key investors have zeroed in on ADXS and that is boosting the pps and the validation we had with Roche. Don't ask me how I know, I do. They are in the drivers seat right now going straight to P2 on some indications with FDA approval and already have secured Orphan status with some still in trials. This company has the management that is making it happen both clinically and financially. The bigs have this one pegged to go up sharply and I sold INCY last year for INO after watching Dr. Kim deliver interviews, my mistake so far.
As far as Listeria vector is concerned, it is getting the job done with data they are loving. We had the mojo last year and we let it slip away. Now it is up to management here to impress the street with what we have with new data. I will say Dr. Kim looks to be all over the place and not focused as was stated above. I think that is the impression others looking at INO are getting as well and why we can't seem to interest big pharma at this point. Still love the theories and the platform, so I will wait for further confirmation.