this one is tracking 3X move of HongKong listed H shares. Although HongKong market trades in tandem with ShangHai A share market in some degree, it does not follow the rules and restrictions that Mainland China imposed on securities. You can still short H shares in HongKong. But be careful that H share is already selling at 40% discount to their peers in A share market, and HongKong market overall is trading at p/e of
those people who bought on margin paying 3.5% margin rate and hoping to get 12% dividend thought this was no brainier. Now they have to sell as PPS dropped too much for them to stay on margin. Time to buy!!!!!
If you are have a deadly disease and I tell you that a drug will lower your risk of dying by 1/50 but has some non-life-threatening side effect, what would you do?
I don't think you understand what "adjuvant therapy" is. Adjuvant therapy is an additional cancer treatment given after the primary treatment to lower the risk that the cancer will come back. Right now, there is no effective adjuvant therapy for breast cancer after primary treatment ends.
I should have said that short sellers misinterpreted the number difference, either they are too stupid to understand the concept or they intentionally mixed things up.
This is exactly how critics misunderstood the difference between relative % difference and absolute % difference. The relative % difference is measured by something called odds ratio or hazard ratio. It works like this, if a trial had 93% vs 91% advantage, the odds ratio benefit will be (.93/.07)/(.91/.09)=1.31 or to say that non-recurring odds is 31% better than placebo. It's in the same ballpark as that reported in the last year. The sophisticate FDA reviewers include a lot of biostatisticians who understander the difference between relative and abosulate difference. The absolute difference is harder and harder to get once the non-recurrence rate getting close to 100%. But A relative odds or hazard ratio benefit can still be large for a small absolute % difference in the 90% range. It may not matter much in 50% range though. FDA will look at hazard ratio not abosulate difference when they review. Ignore short sellers as most of them are just playing number games and tell you what you can see on the surface.
I told you that NFLX getting into China is the biggest hype ever. It's not going to happen. Even it happens, it will be a total failure as those tried before.
Pure hype, never going to happen. They use that to pump share price.
A drug had benefit of DFS at 0.05 significance. It will have positive survival benefit as recurrence is closely tied up with survival in any kind of cancer. Follow-up of BC survival may require much longer period of time as most of patients now-days live longer than 5 years. By judging upon DFS along would be enough to get the drug approved by FDA as it increase 2 year DFS by more than 2%. The benefit looks "small" at surface because the BC nowadays is much more curable cancer than 10, 20 years ago. But any match towards 100% is a huge advance as we are approaching 100% closer and closer. Will you think a increase DFS at two year from 99% to 100% a small increment one day? which drug you will take if you are give an chance of 1% recurrence vs. no chance for recurrence if you have a deadly disease? The answer is quite obvious for most cancer patients! I will take that 17% of non-life-threatening side effect any day for 1% more chance of non-recurrence. Let alone the competitive drug group (placebo) also had non-zero diarrhea side effect?!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
2% more chance of recurrence means 1/50 more chances to be dead as recurrence usually means death sentence. 2% death rate is huge in health population, dude! I will take out that chance out to exchange 17% non-life threatening side effect any day. Remember that 2% less chance is statistically significant so it did not occur by chance, if you understand what I am saying.