DDD is nearing long term support at $8.83. This support rests on the former long term highs of July 2007 and July 2005 both at $8.83. DDD first broke above $8.83 in Oct 2010. It ran up to $19.57 but, by Oct 2011 it had come back down and was testing $8.83 support. Support held and from there it was up until $97. Now we're back to long term support once again. If you've been waiting to put on a long term position this is where you begin to do it. This is also the vicinity from where I would expect some sort of bounce, probably in conjunction with the announcement of a new CEO. After a bounce I would expect a retest and a marginal new low.
Also it is unlikely that ONVO's products will reveal any problems that arise with long term use since the tissues are only viable for about 40 days.
How does the CEO of any company make net profits grow? There is really only two ways. He can sell more of whatever it is the company is selling or he can save money by reducing expenses. Of the two reducing expenses is the most sure fire way to increase net profits because 100% of each penny saved goes straight to the bottom line. This is what Ben Franklin was talking about when he said “a penny saved is a penny earned”. As has already been explained drug companies spend millions doing animal testing and then spend millions more in initial human testing often just to find out that their new drug candidate has toxicity problems that were not revealed in earlier tests. The drug has to be scrapped wasting the millions already spent on development and testing. If ONVO has tests that can reveal these toxicity problems before human testing and possibly even before animal testing, then tens of millions can be saved on the testing of drugs that would only fail in the end. For a large drug firm this could add up to hundreds of millions of dollars each year. These savings would go directly to net profits, the bottom line. To the CEO of a major drug company this has more profit potential than almost any new drug his company can come up with.
First we don't really know that ONVO is still under the radar. ONVO has decline to tell us at this time exactly how many contracts are pending. The reason for that is probably because the contracts are in fact cancellable. It's a completely new product based on a completely new technology. Undoubtedly customers would want to be able to cancel if it didn't work for them. But if we assume that ONVO is facing some resistance the thing that will cure that is results. The word gets around. If I am the CEO of the Big X Drug Company and I find out that my competitors over at Bigger Y Pharmaceuticals are saving money using this system the first thing I'm going to do is find out how I can get ONVO's product for my company. The second thing I'm going to do is find out who in my company knew about it and didn't inform me.
You guys don't seem to understand how this works. A company would use ONVO's tissues early in drug development to see if there is any initial danger to humans. If nothing shows up on tissue testing the company will move on to human trials. If problems don't show up during these human trials they certainly aren't going to show up on ONVO's tissues either. If you could get tissues to live as long as humans do then you might be able to do long term testing but why would you want to when your product is already being used on a daily basis by patients in the real world. The real world is the best testing laboratory you can get. Although there is no legal obligation for a company to continue testing once a drug has been granted FDA approval, virtually all drug companies will continue to track the success rate of their drugs after approval. If problems begin to show up a responsible company will inform the FDA and pull the drug. That's how you prevent law suits and limit liability.
When I said "real world" I was referring to after a drug has been approved by the FDA. Once a drug has been approved and is being prescribed for patients by doctors and has been out in the real world for several years, that is the time when any long term problems, if any exist, will show up. By definition there is no other way to determine if long term problems might exist except to use the drug long term. This is why drug companies track their products after FDA approval.
At it's current burn rate DDD has enough cash to last 10 years. Their monthly cash burn is averaging 1.2 million. Divide that into their 150 million cash and you get 125 months. And yes this is before any cost cutting.
currently drug companies are using single layer randomly spread kidney or liver cells in a dish to test of toxicity. It's already been proven that ONVO's liver product is vastly superior to that because it is actual living liver and kidney tissue with the same structure found in the organ tissue. There's really no question about this.
I bought into ONVO between recently when it hit 2.50 & also at 2.20 where I did the bulk of my buying. I'd never touched it before that. So how much is it really worth? Obviously I think it's worth more than what I paid. Given the current cost of discovering and bringing a new drug to market (currently around 2.9 billion, Forbes estimates it at closer to 5 billion), any business that can significantly reduce that cost will likely be very successful. My guess is a little ways down the road investors will look at the $13 dollar high and think of it as having been a bargain.
Today, 95% of Illumina is owned by institutions. I wonder how much institutions owned in 2003 when the price hit 1 dollar?