Capella
Footballguy
Nader and cydy aren’t the ones evaluating the data dude. You know that right?"Business Day"
Every day is a business day when you JUST unblinded data on a drug you believe could save the world and make you rich.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
***OFFICIAL CYDY/Leronlimab Thread*** (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter This_Guy
- Start date
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
Of course NP's dumb ### isn't being let anywhere near the data
You're not going to convince me the data wasn't being evaluated over the weekend. Sorry. You don't open the new Christmas present on a Friday then put it on the shelf till Monday. Particularly when this is quite literally a race to find a cure.
Last edited by a moderator:
Capella
Footballguy
I’m sure it was. What difference does it make. Call it 3 days instead of 1 business day, doesn’t change the point of data being evaluated unless you want to drag me into a pointless pissing matchOf course NP's dumb ### isn't being let anywhere near the data
You're not going to convince me the data wasn't being evaluated over the weekend. Sorry. You don't open the new Christmas present on a Friday then put it on the shelf till Monday. Particularly when this is quite literally a race to find a cure.
[icon]
Insoxicated
I'm just pointing out silly qualifications. You're obviously too far in the bag over this equity to be objective... and that's okay.
But if you believe "3 days vs 1 day doesn't change the point of data being evaluated", (and I don't disagree) then why throw in the obviously false qualification?
This thread Is better when we are being objective and realistic.
@Whyatt is it typical to releases efficacy data a few days after unblinding it?
djmich
Footballguy
This thread is not big, how long it takes to analyze the data has been discussed alot
https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/786660-official-chet-diddy-talk-cydy-leronlimab-potential-covid-treatment/?do=findComment&comment=22852439
Capella
Footballguy
Because one business day is one business day and while I assume the company doing it is working over the weekend you can’t guarantee that.
You thought CYDY were the ones evaluating the data so I wouldn’t talk about anybody’s ability to evaluate what’s going on. I’ve pointed out flaws in this stock almost daily so I really don’t know what you’re talking about there.
Last I’m saying on this pointless go around.
Last edited by a moderator:
adonis
Footballguy
Not accusing them of pump and dump and I’m sure the receptors themselves are established science, but the story carrying Cydy is that Covid is a Rantes disease and leronlimab calms the immune response based on the pathway BP describes as being operational in Covid.
ive worked in science labs, read scientific papers, and you can have folks who believe the data shows something (not lying) but when they go to publish other researchers point out valid flaws in their logic, methodology, etc.
I suppose I am trying to ascertain how big a risk there is in piling money into an unproven company with an unproven drug based on non-scientifically accepted pathways for Covid. Certainly the papers may come and BP’s submitted paper may get published but it’s yet another thing that is pending to validate the company’s value.
Anything that calls into question BP’s reliability (I don’t believe at all he’s lying...but he could just be wrong) would collapse my support of the company as it’s his expertise propping up the company in my mind. And I haven’t heard a ton mentioned about the risks here as it seems to me he’s presenting a rather novel Take on what’s going on with Covid, granted with some evidence, but it’s not peer reviewed and subjected to scrutiny by experts.
he may end up being right...but again, it’s just another piece we have to accept on faith.
matuski
Footballguy
Jayrok
Footballguy
Sound to me like her company is looking to buy out Cytodyn for the drug. If results are good and looks like approval, they may make them an offer they can't refuse.
Caesar
Footballguy
This was my initial thought as well after reading it. I can't see why else someone wouldn't be able to comment on a rival treatment.
If she thought it was a sham, I'm not sure why she would feel compelled to keep that to herself. I also don't see why she wouldn't comment if its a legit threat.
I think the potential buyout is the the most likely reason, but I'm sure there could be others.
Jayrok
Footballguy
He's in it to make money. Why else? He's been wrong on other shorted stocks. Seem to remember he attacked Tesla as well. That didn't work out so well for his rep.
He'll just move on to another money making campaign with other companies. He doesn't care if he's right... just that he makes money. And the biotech market is often a slam dunk for these types of guys because so many of them are bound to fail. Many are put up on a silver platter for him and his shorts.
I remember when I got chided before the run up to $10 that I'd be more than happy with a buyout around there not because I wouldn't want to see it higher but because this has become a bit of a chore at this point. I wonder how many in here who didn't like the buyout idea would take it in a heartbeat right now. I definitely feel better overall having sold 1/3 on Monday (at $6.40). I really hope I end up wishing I didn't sell that 1/3 yet, but it did lighten the concern.
Jayrok
Footballguy
Also think if she thought it was a sham she'd roll her eyes or something like that. Especially if she's below 40! If there's an NDA, sounds like something is up. Either way, she certainly is familiar with LL.
djmich
Footballguy
Exactly, his motive is to take a situation that can be exploited and make money from it. He doesn't care if he's right or wrong in the long run.
Now, that doesn't mean he is wrong, but when I read anything he's written the fact that it is written in such a juvenile manner and without regard for any counterpoint/balance leads me to believe he has no interest in all the facts.
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Idk if a researcher on a drug would be involved in a buyout discussion, this feels like a reach to me, and I’ve thought about the Gilead buyout angle before. They might be asked for an opinion, but not a buyout. If it was a scam, I’d expect that in a response, but honestly, idk.
Jayrok
Footballguy
I'd be happy with a buy out. Not sure the details for us investors... hope at least $20 and some shares of the buying company. Or straight $30+ and I'd be happy to walk.
Capella
Footballguy
Yea 20 or 30 and now you’re talking. That potentially could be the range the stock price is at though it all this stuff goes as well (big big if) as we hope, so I assume it would have to be more than that.
Very true. Look at biotech right now. I disagree with what Mark Cuban said about the dot com comparison to the current stock market. I was right there in the Internet software business and back in that era, there were stock valuations based on eye balls and revenue didn't matter. Companies that I own like LVGO, FSLY and even AMZN have real revenues and real cash flows (lots of reinvestment so earnings can be less) and that wasn't the case back then. I know because I worked with companies worth billions that had nothing, I mean nothing but an idea. His comments about the dot com comparison IMHO are 100% accurate when looking at biotech companies. Moderna has nothing real yet, worth tens of billions. There is going to be a giant reckoning in biotech, CYDY could be among them. They have been shot to the moon based on pre-clinical trial news. There's probably 10-15 things in my house that I could pour into a petri dish of CV-19 and kill all of the virus. If I was listed on the Nasdaq and made a press release about it, I'd double or triple my market cap that day.
That is what makes it easy on AF to dog a company, because there's a better than 80% chance the company goes belly up and just like the scam for football betting, if you send out enough flyers, there will be enough people that think you are the best stock picker.
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
I don’t think this company is getting bought. If you were a CEO of a large pharma, would you take that risk of being made a fool by some maroon like NP?
Jayrok
Footballguy
Agree. He does well I'm sure and, obviously, his pieces have some impact. But CYDY isn't the only ticker on his radar. It's his living and at the end of the day it's all about the $$.
That said, I do believe there is a limit to how far he can bleed one of these turnips. One piece caused a huge drop. Another hit piece didn't even move the SP that much. The longer it goes, the less impact his fluff pieces have.
Now, if the results are not good he'll post another one but, honestly, that piece won't have anything to do with the fall that would follow. The science will be the culprit.
I'd take $10 at this point and walk away with a nice chunk of change. $20 would blow my mind. Again, I really hope I regret selling on Monday.
If the drug works, NP isn't in the picture after the buyout. That's all you'd need, take the ball and run and don't worry about NP.
Bob Sacamano
Footballguy
⚡DEADHEAD⚡
Footballguy
Jayrok
Footballguy
Capella
Footballguy
Nah. The science is the science. They’ll give him a truckload of cash and he’ll be gone.
⚡DEADHEAD⚡
Footballguy
Truth be told, that was my first thought, but there are so many other reasonable possibilities.
Charlie Harper
Footballguy
Longitudinal COVID-19 profiling associates IL-1RA and IL-10 with disease severity and RANTES with mild disease
Another group found RANTES elevation in mild, but not severe.
Role of CCL5 (RANTES) in Viral Lung Disease
Another group of RANTES and this time RSV in mice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jayrok
Footballguy
Well, if the results are good enough and it gets approved for treatment and/or the HIV BLA is approved... I don't think GILD would care much about NP or being made fool of.
It's why I think they're waiting for results, if (IF) there is a possibility of a buy out.
adonis
Footballguy
My take is that it's not a pump and dump. It's an inexperienced management team trying to launch a new drug that has a lot of indicators. Good success with HIV but that road is longer to approval. Covid-19 fell out of sky and leronlimab has indications for it and some favorable trials. BP thinks he knows what's going on, and he may be right, but it's still risky to trust that without peer review. However, bolstering that claim is the other widespread interest in monoclonal antibodies for this disease, regardless of the RANTES connection or the MOA for disease BP discusses.
The indications and smell of pump and dump is a company with a CEO committed to the drug, passionate about it, but who is moving at a pace and in a market far out of his depth. The pace to get trials going, up and running, do FDA approval, push for uplisting, all major strategic changes within a year, is a tough thing to pull off, especially for someone who's never done anything like this before.
What it looks like is an inexperienced team with a promising drug they believe in, are passionate about, that has good initial results, and their pressing the pedal to the floor to get the drug approved so it can help people and make their business successful. Their optimism boils over into unmet expectations and promises, but all done with the best of intentions because they're moving fast...they want others to know that as well.
So for me, the company is promising solidly long term. It's hugely risky if you're thinking you'll make a ton of money short term, but again the odds aren't as bad as other plays you could make based off preliminary data, BP, and the safety established in previous trials. I'm still in, but with more tempered views on returns in short term unless Covid is a homerun, which it may not be. Even if that misses, longer term it's a good play it seems...just maybe not at these prices
The indications and smell of pump and dump is a company with a CEO committed to the drug, passionate about it, but who is moving at a pace and in a market far out of his depth. The pace to get trials going, up and running, do FDA approval, push for uplisting, all major strategic changes within a year, is a tough thing to pull off, especially for someone who's never done anything like this before.
What it looks like is an inexperienced team with a promising drug they believe in, are passionate about, that has good initial results, and their pressing the pedal to the floor to get the drug approved so it can help people and make their business successful. Their optimism boils over into unmet expectations and promises, but all done with the best of intentions because they're moving fast...they want others to know that as well.
So for me, the company is promising solidly long term. It's hugely risky if you're thinking you'll make a ton of money short term, but again the odds aren't as bad as other plays you could make based off preliminary data, BP, and the safety established in previous trials. I'm still in, but with more tempered views on returns in short term unless Covid is a homerun, which it may not be. Even if that misses, longer term it's a good play it seems...just maybe not at these prices
⚡DEADHEAD⚡
Footballguy
NP is great for GILD. Keeps the cost lower. We should have a higher market cap and we would if this whole thing had been handled with more professionalism. NP has no vision, no strategy. Saves GILD what, a few hundred million at least? A billion?
adonis
Footballguy
Jayrok
Footballguy
Don Hutson
Footballguy
Let's see if CYDY stays true to form and drops 10% now.
⚡DEADHEAD⚡
Footballguy
I'm with you on a lot of what you say, but your reference to the team being "inexperienced" is too kind IMO. NP is in over his head. To say he's inexperienced suggests he will improve as he matures, but I see no evidence of that. He somewhat stumbled into this role, and now he has to perform on a stage that greatly out-represents his skillset. He's just not the guy for the job.My take is that it's not a pump and dump. It's an inexperienced management team trying to launch a new drug that has a lot of indicators. Good success with HIV but that road is longer to approval. Covid-19 fell out of sky and leronlimab has indications for it and some favorable trials. BP thinks he knows what's going on, and he may be right, but it's still risky to trust that without peer review. However, bolstering that claim is the other widespread interest in monoclonal antibodies for this disease, regardless of the RANTES connection or the MOA for disease BP discusses.
The indications and smell of pump and dump is a company with a CEO committed to the drug, passionate about it, but who is moving at a pace and in a market far out of his depth. The pace to get trials going, up and running, do FDA approval, push for uplisting, all major strategic changes within a year, is a tough thing to pull off, especially for someone who's never done anything like this before.
What it looks like is an inexperienced team with a promising drug they believe in, are passionate about, that has good initial results, and their pressing the pedal to the floor to get the drug approved so it can help people and make their business successful. Their optimism boils over into unmet expectations and promises, but all done with the best of intentions because they're moving fast...they want others to know that as well.
So for me, the company is promising solidly long term. It's hugely risky if you're thinking you'll make a ton of money short term, but again the odds aren't as bad as other plays you could make based off preliminary data, BP, and the safety established in previous trials. I'm still in, but with more tempered views on returns in short term unless Covid is a homerun, which it may not be. Even if that misses, longer term it's a good play it seems...just maybe not at these prices
Last edited by a moderator:
Bluto Blutarsky
Footballguy
Thank you for the reply and i think a lot here agree on on the company side regarding timelines and promises.
Regarding the drug, you've called it old a few times, but does this matter? Is it rare for drugs to be repurposed or to be bought by a different company a used slightly differently?
Surely CYDY isn't the only company with an "old drug" that they're trying to make work for covid, right?
cosjobs
Footballguy
They are buying the drug, not the CEO and I'm sure they can do their due diligence on that. They can change the CEO
I’m going to need to read this. If RANTES isn’t elevated in severe, isn’t that a gap in the COVID is a RANTES disease and it will work for severe?
I’m not a virologist, my question is naive. Has this question been asked/answered by Dr. Patterson?
cosjobs
Footballguy
Chaz McNulty
Footballguy
Read the history of Remdesivir. It's not as old, but tried and failed on 4 different diseases over it's 11 years. It actually failed its first trials against Covid-19 in China in March and they stopped the trials. It's funny how many chances you get when you are part of big pharma.
Don Hutson
Footballguy
I thought Patterson had reported RANTES was elevated a hundredfold in severe cases. But I'm an expert in panties, not rantes.
Pretty much every CV19 therapeutic is a drug being repurposed. Dexamethasone, the drug he’s touted, was created in 1957. As I’ve stated, I don’t believe anything he says is from a true virtuous objective place. He mentioned 4-6 weeks for typical unblinding to release and then mentions AF being right about attacking on efficacy results not being release on Tuesday less than a week after unblinding kicked off. He says he’s got no stake or position but he’s quoting known shorts and said in his first post that he’s looking to short the stock. Heck, he mentioned working in supply chain and now he’s working on launching new treatments. I’ve actually worked with teams in the sourcing/supply chain at Gilead in the past and I wouldn’t expect them to be drug experts on trials, etc.
Googling makes being an expert very easy. I’ve got a really good and photographic memory so I tend to remember too much stupid stuff but I’ve just seen way too many examples of saying opposites and jumping into the thread just being a megaphone for AF until questioned.
You are 100% correct, old drugs for Covid make no difference. Dexamethazone is the perfect example here.
For HIV, research is advancing, it’s expected, but not guaranteed, that new drugs have an advantage.
Capella
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
