Hey Footmax,
You're funny mate, going to go all TA on us now
Based on people not having watched Management commentary, People not having analysed the data provided and saying things like they wont, they'll rely on opinions of Drs, etc etc... I have little confidence that the "market" is trading heavily on if you like fundamentals. Clearly threes disparate views, which is expected, and not abnormal at this stage.
Have you watched the video or ran the analysis yet? What do you make of the relative rate of decline achieved in headline? Why do you think Becker was optimistic and stated there's interest?
I saw Sanofi out overnight commenting of future directions, interesting ?
Where I think you have merit in your thought process is that the market is if you like frazzled by the delay. I wonder how much the negativity here (which is likely one of the only developed sources of commentary available for a stock with coverage like this) It has taken longer than "the market" would like. Equally it taken about as long as it takes, and as MM said the trials are tailored.
I see it like, "the market" has historically run up a lot on the prospect of success. Which is again understandable in the circumstances. I think MM likely has some visibility over this and is equally frustrated by undue negativity. The comment that a deal could drop at any time without notice was imo forward notice,
So I'm very comfortable taking a positive view in this very contrarian environment, especially with the significance of the upside as illustrated. Equally very comfortable to critique undue negativity here, because it is (at times) genuinely not factual, heavily swayed by trading emotion or say in your case prior industry experience, and of course so frequently by intent to obtain superior entry price - as I personally think was illustrated by WB.
Don't misconstrue a desire to not see false negativity or similar as a suggestion that I think that this comes with a guarantee, like I said the other day and in various ways previously. People definitely need to take that into consideration here. Do their own research, invest or not accordingly as they see fit for their circumstances.
When I first joined up, I hoped to see objectivity and far less in regard to ST market moves, attempts to influence, emotive stupidity etc. An experience like talking to an objective analyst if you will. Obviously this is not devoid of same, but its overlaid with a lot of rubbish, can you say that's not the cause of the present market price? $$$$ above said the IPO should be multiple dollars now. As I said the other day, its more likely a little over a dollar with a 10% hurdle. So lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say its $1-2.
I listened to most of the webinar between calls yesterday. I personally think it was a fairly balanced presentation. Essentially it works, we need to work out why, derisk it for BP. Multiple BP are interested, Some more so than others, due different appetites. The breadth of success here creates a the potential for a broad spectrum solution. Possibility for cancer as well. A novel approach.
As I've said here for months, Becker also highlighted a question as to whether longer treatment or more potent treatment would achieve outright success.
Why is it that Ive analysed this stock from publicly available information and what Ive said over months has been essentially verified by this webinar (eg our debates re whether they are in discussions or not, finance of rebate- there are more examples), I've been demonstrable proven correct and your telling me I'm lecturing people that have clearly got it wrong? Why would you say that? I've always suggested people critique me, I've always said I don't have definitive insight?
Careful people don't come to the view that you misinformation out there, You've said you were considering buying it twice that I'm aware of.
I do like your analytical approach, and frankly the moderating prior experience you bring, but you need to realise that past experience doesn't necessarily correlate to future right? Trading imo sits even beyond that. Sometimes you don't have the answer and have to go with a strategy based on estimation, sometimes you win on this sort of thing and its great, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you can be right about something and its immaterial, either because its blindsided by something else or maybe because it wasn't as beneficial as you thought. You get my point right?
I do believe they are like they said, looking to licence or sell. I think the question is as I said the other day, at what price and what are they looking to sell, to whom or maybe to "whom's"
I think the low end number in the larger SH mind is logically in that $1-2 range per above. Potentially less for a partial licence arrangement, maybe more like Gritstone, circa $1 plus ongoing split. High end, who knows - what are we selling? Who's keen? What does the COVID result look like, how well can we prove up the clinical side, does the regulator know what they want to see. Will it only be proven by larger BP.
As I said the other day, essentially I think we are apart on price. I like the fact that we are talking to multiple BP
So all your concerns apart from overall risk in development, I see as not factual or irrelevant there based on overall picture, timing etc.
Not asking you to invest in it. Just to be mindful of being objective as I think it creates some degree contagion when the WB types get a hold of your devolvement phobia. As I said the other day, I see that as an affront to my holding, indented or otherwise and the ramification of same are unquantified.
Take Care
DYOR
