What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Stock Thread (19 Viewers)

fantasycurse42 said:
https://www.cytodyn.com/newsroom/press-releases/detail/453/update---impressive-results-from-cytodyns-phase-2

What is this second press release? It looks identical to the first. I hate NP, he is a complete buffoon. 

ETA (let me decipher what this idiot had to put out a 2nd time):

COVID is capitalized in the headline of the update

"(11 SAEs in 28 Patients) " "(8 SAEs in 56 Patients) "

"Serious Adverse Events"
Click to expand...
All in the bolded headline, this was the entire update. This guy is just amazingly incompetent. 

 
fantasycurse42 said:
https://www.cytodyn.com/newsroom/press-releases/detail/453/update---impressive-results-from-cytodyns-phase-2

What is this second press release? It looks identical to the first. I hate NP, he is a complete buffoon. 

ETA (let me decipher what this idiot had to put out a 2nd time):

COVID is capitalized in the headline of the update

"(11 SAEs in 28 Patients) " "(8 SAEs in 56 Patients) "

ETA 2: I could keep adding this stuff, but it's all NP, he is a ####### idiot. 
Click to expand...
He is... ugh.  Headline is 11 SAEs in 28 patients in Placebo Arm as compared to only 8 SAEs in 56 patients...

Then three lines below... it says Leronlimab: 5 patients out of 56 reported SAE, none related to Leronlimab.  And then Placebo:  6 patients out of 28 reported SAE.

So which is it?  11 in 28 or 6 in 28?  Is it 5 of 56 or is it 8 of 56?  

Good grief o'mighty.  

 
Moonlight said:
Not leading with your efficacy data is putting things backwards. Maybe saving these results for shareholders meeting.
Click to expand...
The safety numbers are likely much easier to tally and report than all of the measurements. I’m not surprised that they did it that way. They could have held it but as mentioned NP referenced Tuesday so they hit that. I was still expecting after the bell today regardless of the details.

 
stbugs said:
The safety numbers are likely much easier to tally and report than all of the measurements. I’m not surprised that they did it that way. They could have held it but as mentioned NP referenced Tuesday so they hit that. I was still expecting after the bell today regardless of the details.
Click to expand...
There's a reason it typically takes 4-6 weeks.

 
Jayrok said:
He is... ugh.  Headline is 11 SAEs in 28 patients in Placebo Arm as compared to only 8 SAEs in 56 patients...

Then three lines below... it says Leronlimab: 5 patients out of 56 reported SAE, none related to Leronlimab.  And then Placebo:  6 patients out of 28 reported SAE.

So which is it?  11 in 28 or 6 in 28?  Is it 5 of 56 or is it 8 of 56?  

Good grief o'mighty.  
Click to expand...
Now says events in one and patients in the other.

 
Jayrok said:
He is... ugh.  Headline is 11 SAEs in 28 patients in Placebo Arm as compared to only 8 SAEs in 56 patients...

Then three lines below... it says Leronlimab: 5 patients out of 56 reported SAE, none related to Leronlimab.  And then Placebo:  6 patients out of 28 reported SAE.

So which is it?  11 in 28 or 6 in 28?  Is it 5 of 56 or is it 8 of 56?  

Good grief o'mighty.  
Click to expand...
11 were in 6 patients out of 28 and 8 were in the 5 patients out of 56. 

This goes back to my question if the deceased patient caused 3 or 4 of these, then that really skews the numbers. When you break it down by SAE, you can see there is a statistical difference. Unfortunately, we have a guy who could #### up a cup of coffee leading a clinical study during a pandemic.

The data is solid, the idiot knows that much, prob why he reiterates it after getting no positive recognition. The efficacy and safety will blow Remdisivir out of the water. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
stbugs said:
The safety numbers are likely much easier to tally and report than all of the measurements. I’m not surprised that they did it that way. They could have held it but as mentioned NP referenced Tuesday so they hit that. I was still expecting after the bell today regardless of the details.
Click to expand...
His referencing Tuesday put him in a bind that was self made. To me you wait until you have all the results together and you lead with efficacy as your headline followed by safety. That helps you get national traction. I guess we just have to wait.

Regardless shorts will look for any weakness in result reporting.

 
Jayrok said:
He is... ugh.  Headline is 11 SAEs in 28 patients in Placebo Arm as compared to only 8 SAEs in 56 patients...

Then three lines below... it says Leronlimab: 5 patients out of 56 reported SAE, none related to Leronlimab.  And then Placebo:  6 patients out of 28 reported SAE.

So which is it?  11 in 28 or 6 in 28?  Is it 5 of 56 or is it 8 of 56?  

Good grief o'mighty.  
Click to expand...
Yes

 
fantasycurse42 said:
11 were in 6 patients out of 28 and 8 were in the 5 patients out of 56. 

This goes back to my question if the deceased patient caused 3 or 4 of these, then that really skews the numbers. When you break it down by SAE, you can see their is a statistical difference. Unfortunately, we have a guy who could #### up a cup of coffee leading a clinical study during a pandemic.

The data is solid, the idiot knows that much, prob why he reiterates it after getting no positive recognition. The efficacy and safety will blow Remdisivir out of the water. 
Click to expand...
Ah.. thanks.  I see it now.  

 
Moonlight said:
His referencing Tuesday put him in a bind that was self made. To me you wait until you have all the results together and you lead with efficacy as your headline followed by safety. That helps you get national traction. I guess we just have to wait.

Regardless shorts will look for any weakness in result reporting.
Click to expand...
You won’t see me argue about their release of information not being the best. That’s why I was so annoyed when the conference calls with no good info kept coming. They aren’t good at this stuff and filing paperwork.

 
Chaz McNulty said:
A poster from Yahoo sent this.

"Dr. Kelly,

Good morning.

I’m sure you have more important things to focus on, but SOMETHING has to be done regarding the crafting of these PR’s. They are awful and this is not the first time the company has issued a critical PR that was confusing, lacked structure, deviated from conventional standards and negatively impacted the share price. I was once in charge of corporate communications for a small company that had a national footprint. Please consider a few changes in the future. Here are some pointers.

1. The PR should start with an encompassing headline; not details. The PR starts with “39% of Patients in Placebo Arm Had SAEs as Compared to Only 14% of Patients in Leronlimab Arm Had SAEs, Which Were Unrelated to Leronlimab.” It should have started with something more like “Leronlimab Demonstrates a 58.4% Reduction in Serious Adverse Events with ZERO SAE’s Attributed To Leronlimab.” That was your headline! That’s what captures the reader.

2. Numbers aren’t presented uniformly. Your bi-line states, “Leronlimab: 5 patients out of 56 (about 9%) reported serious adverse events, none were related to leronlimab”. But in the body of the PR it states, “Eleven (11) SAEs were reported in 6 patients (6/28; 21.4%) receiving placebo compared to eight (8) SAEs in 5 patients (5/56; 8.9%). In one place, the PR refers to “9%.” In another, the PR uses “8.9%” to refer to the same number. Since the two statements aren’t adjacent, the data is more confusing.

3. The author’s framework is completely lacking and had they incorporated better emphasis for the different data points, we would have had a much better communication. For instance, start with the more mild data points and then move towards the most critical cases or vice versa. But, at least have a framework. Start each section with an encompassing statement and then drill down on the data. Sell the sizzle, then present the steak. For instance:

a. “Adverse Events. Leronlimab showed a marked 32% reduction in Adverse Events. 14 out of 28 patients (50%) in the placebo group experienced adverse events whereas only 19 out of 56 (34%) patients in the Leronlimab arm had an adverse event. The between group difference was 32%. None of the adverse events were attributed to Leronlimab."

b. "Serious Adverse Events. Leronlimab showed a 58.4% reduction in Serious Adverse Events. 6 out of 28 patients (21.4%) in the placebo group experienced a serious adverse event whereas only 5 out of 56 (8.9%) patients in the Leronlimab arm had an adverse event. The between group difference was 58.4%. None of the adverse events were attributed to Leronlimab."

c. "Deaths. Only ONE death was reported in the entire trial. The death was not attributed to Leronlimab."

I’ve tried to communicate this to management previously. Apparently, it fell on deaf ears. I pray, the company starts applying a more scientific approach to the crafting of these PR’s. Your stock is down today but for one reason: the PR was poorly crafted. Once is a mistake. Twice is a problem. We shouldn’t need to follow up PR’s with multiple videos. That’s not the way a Fortune 500 company communicates. And yes, that’s the way management needs to start thinking about this. You are now on the global stage and these missteps can’t continue.

I’ve brought quite a few shareholders to the company and my position is x figures. I hope you are open to constructive criticism from those that have a vested interest in the company’s success.

Regards,"
Click to expand...
They need to hire this guy ASAP.  

 
NajehHejan said:
Why isn't all my money in this Vanguard Treasury Bond ETF - name is EDV - here are the returns

1 yr 34.25%

3 yr 54.28%

5 yr 80.32%

10 yr 171.44%
Click to expand...
What do you think the analogous percents are for AAPL or AMZN? I bet they are in line if not better but I am too lazy to track them down.

 
stbugs said:
They aren’t good at this stuff and filing paperwork.
Click to expand...
They aren’t good at anything, but in all likelihood, they have a product that’s much safer and provides better outcomes than what’s on the market.

I would be so happy to put someone competent in the Captain’s Chair. I’d be all-in on this if it wasn’t for NP.

 
NajehHejan said:
@siffoinCan you answer my recent question on EDV? Your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Maybe not put ALL your $ in there.  LT might be a problem if interest rates begin to rise.  Personally I do have a portion of my portfolio in LT Treasuries.  Ray Dalio's All-Weather portfolio allocates something like 40% to LT Treasuries.  $EDV seems slightly better than $TLT, but they are pretty similar.  Bullish trends on a Daily, Weekly and Monthly chart.  Near term support in the mid-160's.

 
So the conf call with investors is tomorrow during trading day.  They're probably going to pass the adding of 100M shares.  What would you expect the stock price to be after this is announced?  4?  

Then another short attack saying OMGG NP is selling all his shares, etc and so forth.  

Expectations?  

 
Big League Chew said:
noob question... 

CYDY

im using ameritrade i have around 2k shares. i want to sell some but am unsure on when the funds will be 'cleared' so i can buy again?

last time i tried this i got a nasty email saying i cannot use uncleared funds more than a few times per X amount of months
Click to expand...
I think you can sell and buy again right away.  You will have to keep the stock you buy for 2 days so that the funds settle from the first sell.  I'm not totally positive since CYDY is an OTC.  Can anyone confirm this?

 
So it’s treading like it’s going to end down for the day.  This stock is Schizophrenic. 
 

*For clarity sake I’m not complaining as I am in at a cost basis of like .68, so it’s a massive win already, it’s just crazy how this stock acts.  

 
dkp993 said:
So it’s treading like it’s going to end down for the day.  This stock is Schizophrenic. 
 

*For clarity sake I’m not complaining as I am in at a cost basis of like .68, so it’s a massive win already, it’s just crazy how this stock acts.  
Click to expand...
CytoDyn is a fickle mistress

 
dkp993 said:
So it’s treading like it’s going to end down for the day.  This stock is Schizophrenic. 
 

*For clarity sake I’m not complaining as I am in at a cost basis of like .68, so it’s a massive win already, it’s just crazy how this stock acts.  
Click to expand...
I've popped in at $5.50 and sold at $5.90 twice today.  Hoping for one more dip.

 
Jayrok said:
So the conf call with investors is tomorrow during trading day.  They're probably going to pass the adding of 100M shares.  What would you expect the stock price to be after this is announced?  4?  

Then another short attack saying OMGG NP is selling all his shares, etc and so forth.  

Expectations?  
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reminder.  I just voted no.

 
Jayrok said:
So the conf call with investors is tomorrow during trading day.  They're probably going to pass the adding of 100M shares.  What would you expect the stock price to be after this is announced?  4?  

Then another short attack saying OMGG NP is selling all his shares, etc and so forth.  

Expectations?  
Click to expand...
Stock dive.  Investors are not impressed by the data released and no new data will be made available tomorrow.  

Longer this goes on the more fleas that show.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993 said:
So it’s treading like it’s going to end down for the day.  This stock is Schizophrenic. 
 

*For clarity sake I’m not complaining as I am in at a cost basis of like .68, so it’s a massive win already, it’s just crazy how this stock acts.  
Click to expand...
It's been treading up for last two hours.   :loco:

 
Golf Guy 69 said:
How do you vote?
Click to expand...
Not just no, F no.

fruity pebbles said:
Only thing about voting no is do they have the cash to continue operations and potential expansion without it?
Click to expand...
Like the sharks on shark tank say, I'll have no problem funding purchase orders.

needanap said:
Currently 700M shares authorized, this will bump that up to 800M.  Would not affect the current amount 482M of  outstanding shares.  
Click to expand...
Looks like plenty of ammo in reserve already.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Andrew74
2024 FBG Stock Contest
2 3
Replies
104
Views
3K
KGB
KGB
Andrew74
2023 FBG Stock Contest
2
Replies
98
Views
5K
KGB
KGB
KGB
Crypto vs stock market
Replies
10
Views
957
Dr. Octopus
Dr. Octopus

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 20 (members: 0, guests: 20)
Top