Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

***OFFICIAL CYDY/Leronlimab Thread***


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, chet said:

Someone on Reddit posted that the unblinding date appears to be Feb 12.  If that's true, the FDA has had the raw data for a long time which augers well for CYDY IMO.

There have been so many dates thrown around at this point, how can anyone believe any of them.

The last PR made it sound like it was the 22nd of February.  There was also a popular post that made the rounds from some random internet stranger who was putting the Feb 22nd date out as the date the database got unlocked.   I'm inclined to think maybe that post wasn't so random and the 22nd of February was actually the date but at the end of the day, I don't know anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 11.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yes, go ahead FC42

I closed.  Cydy operation mountain house completed.

Told my wife I was about to buy some more and she said that’s what I’ll get to keep in the divorce proceedings 😂😂😭😭😤

9 minutes ago, chet said:

Someone on Reddit posted that the unblinding date appears to be Feb 12.  If that's true, the FDA has had the raw data for a long time which augers well for CYDY IMO.

There's a lot to be said for the first efficacious drug out of the gate.  Isn't HGEN and RLFTF closing in on results also (regarding the day 60 results)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dwayne Hoover said:

Let's start pretending they get an EUA, how quickly do we think the price will run up at open.  If you get market price early enough, you should still see gains from a lot of the run up (i would expect)

Not sure why I'm holding so much of this risky stuff when I can still capitlize on a lot of the run up.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

Let's start pretending they get an EUA, how quickly do we think the price will run up at open.  If you get market price early enough, you should still a lot of the run up (i would expect)

Not sure why I'm holding so much of this risky stuff when I can still get in on a lot of the run up.

I think it would get to $15 pretty quick.  Not sure who would sell shares though.  They are a stubborn group of investors.  And no one would be borrowing shares to short.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Chaz McNulty said:

I think it would get to $15 pretty quick.  Not sure who would sell shares though.  They are a stubborn group of investors.  And no one would be borrowing shares to short.  

Somebody would take profits. 
 

Actually thought today if the results were great I could probably get it at $10 before it really ran up, with none of the risk. But this can be such a popular stock that I’m not sure that’s true. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Capella said:

Somebody would take profits. 
 

Actually thought today if the results were great I could probably get it at $10 before it really ran up, with none of the risk. But this can be such a popular stock that I’m not sure that’s true. 

This is kind of what I was thinking and maybe see a run of $10 to $20 (at least)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Capella said:

Somebody would take profits. 
 

Actually thought today if the results were great I could probably get it at $10 before it really ran up, with none of the risk. But this can be such a popular stock that I’m not sure that’s true. 

Would you sell for $10 if it got approval?  So few people would be taking profits at that level.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Chaz McNulty said:

Would you sell for $10 if it got approval?  So few people would be taking profits at that level.

Yeah, that's a good point.  Not sure how much would be available.

I would probably unload some in the $20-$25 range for sure though

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Chaz McNulty said:

Would you sell for $10 if it got approval?  So few people would be taking profits at that level.

No ####### way.  I’m waiting for three digits baby

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been gone for a while and have been enjoying life not contemplating what the #### Nader could possibly be thinking.

I'm seeing folks seemingly optimistic.  Is this similar to when starving people start hallucinating about steaks or should I light fire to my previous profits and get back in?

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, djmich said:

I've been gone for a while and have been enjoying life not contemplating what the #### Nader could possibly be thinking.

I'm seeing folks seemingly optimistic.  Is this similar to when starving people start hallucinating about steaks or should I light fire to my previous profits and get back in?

 

You have to take a lot of leaps to connect the dots. 

There are some things that point to it may be happening and another slew of things against.

I'm probably the most conflicted one here at this point and will not give any advice

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, djmich said:

I've been gone for a while and have been enjoying life not contemplating what the #### Nader could possibly be thinking.

I'm seeing folks seemingly optimistic.  Is this similar to when starving people start hallucinating about steaks or should I light fire to my previous profits and get back in?

 

Arguments on both sides. To me, the simple fact that the FDA has had unblinded data for at a minimum a week, possibly more, and have kept OLE is telling.  I’m hanging my hat on that frankly. If the data was negative, they’d pull it.  They haven’t.  And that’s all I have to say about that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

Yeah, that's a good point.  Not sure how much would be available.

I would probably unload some in the $20-$25 range for sure though

The short squeeze will be epic and could cause some crazy swings in the stock.  I'd suggest longs watch and be ready to take advantage.

I am thinking about buying back 100k shares tomorrow.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, unckeyherb said:

Arguments on both sides. To me, the simple fact that the FDA has had unblinded data for at a minimum a week, possibly more, and have kept OLE is telling.  I’m hanging my hat on that frankly. If the data was negative, they’d pull it.  They haven’t.  And that’s all I have to say about that.

OLE is a good argument for but it's just another black box to me, no clue how much this is being used, if at all

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

Why hasn't one reporter from a major news source got a sniff that there may be a good story here?

Very good question.  You'd think there would have been some kind of leak but also remember that big pharma pays big $ to lobbyists to keep small companies out.  NP has a terrible reputation within the industry and the regulators.  This is a "show me that it works" situation IMO.  

Don't let the ####### #shortmafia erode your confidence.  Remember that the FDA requested the unblinded data when it was available--according to one poster, it's been available for ~3 weeks and the FDA hasn't rescinded OLE or eIND usage.  Stay long and stay strong!

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

There are always leaks, why isn't this stock moving positively at this point?

Or why isn't it crashing if the data is bad?

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, chet said:

The short squeeze will be epic and could cause some crazy swings in the stock.  I'd suggest longs watch and be ready to take advantage.

I am thinking about buying back 100k shares tomorrow.

Now this is getting interesting.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chet said:

Or why isn't it crashing if the data is bad?

There's been solid support on just about every dip for a month now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chet said:

Or why isn't it crashing if the data is bad?

Cause most people are holding in the off chance NP delivers. I don't think anyone left doubts CYDY has huge potential, but I think we all just differ on the odds of that happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chet said:

Or why isn't it crashing if the data is bad?

Seems like it would be more likely that there would be forward price movement than backwards.   We'd have to assume whoever is on the receiving end of this info would have something to even sell.  However if positive, a new person would surely buy in.

Not sure how many of the retail investors have access to this kind of information.

Lately its moved more backward than forward as well, so may not outright crash but certainly isn't bullish movement

Edited by Dwayne Hoover
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of media interest is going to be the one thing that if this gets shot down, I'm going to be mad at myself for not going with my gut.  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

If the results are going to be great I can't come up with one good reason why it hasn't got coverage yet.  The media is desperately looking for some good news to counter some of the gloom. Certainly not every reporter is beholden to big pharma.  

If Nader gives off a vibe that the media won't even touch, that's not a good sign either.  They won't even talk to Patterson though, why aren't they curious?

I've tried to get the word out, no one will bite.  If there is coverage, it's either a local station or it's generally unfavorable from the likes of Stat News.

Now if the results are middle of the road, this makes a lot more sense.

Edited by Dwayne Hoover
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

The lack of media interest is going to be the one thing that if this gets shot down, I'm going to be mad at myself for not going with my gut.  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

If the results are going to be great I can't come up with one good reason why it hasn't got coverage yet.  The media is desperately looking for some good news to counter some of the gloom. Certainly not every reporter is beholden to big pharma.  

If Nader gives off a vibe that the media won't even touch, that's not a good sign either.  They won't even talk to Patterson though, why aren't they curious?

I've tried to get the word out, no one will bite.  If there is coverage, it's either a local station or it's generally unfavorable from the likes of Stat News.

Now if the results are middle of the road, this makes a lot more sense.

I have a journalism degree and background. If you were a reporter what angle would you cover this from? You don’t have any data. CD 10 went nowhere. The ceo doesn’t seem competent. What’s the story you’re writing as a journalist and not a stakeholder?

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Capella said:

I have a journalism degree and background. If you were a reporter what angle would you cover this from? You don’t have any data. CD 10 went nowhere. The ceo doesn’t seem competent. What’s the story you’re writing as a journalist and not a stakeholder?

Incompetent CEO stumbles getting potential life saving drug to market. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Capella said:

I have a journalism degree and background. If you were a reporter what angle would you cover this from? You don’t have any data. CD 10 went nowhere. The ceo doesn’t seem competent. What’s the story you’re writing as a journalist and not a stakeholder?

This drug is sitting with the FDA for an approval decision, I think I might mention it somewhere, especially if I'm regularly covering therapeutics and vaccines.

I'd cover it from the angle of an underdog company that no one has ever heard of that is on the verge of making a splash in the market.

I'd start talking to Doctors who are close to this and get more information about a novel way to fight infection.

There is a story here and anyone close to the FDA, the prescription drug market would want to cover it at this point.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

This drug is sitting with the FDA for an approval decision, I think I might mention it somewhere, especially if I'm regularly covering therapeutics and vaccines.

I'd cover it from the angle of an underdog company that no one has ever heard of that is on the verge of making a splash in the market.

I'd start talking to Doctors who are close to this and get more information about a novel way to fight infection.

There is a story here and anyone close to the FDA, the prescription drug market would want to cover it at this point.

 

That’s not news, just speculation. No editor/publisher is going to go with that. A biotech company in a trial with no results posted isn’t news. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Capella said:

That’s not news, just speculation. No editor/publisher is going to go with that. A biotech company in a trial with no results posted isn’t news. 

If this news is going to be great, people talk.  There are certainly reporters who have ins at the FDA who are going to find out things.  That nothing has been leaked is insane at this point.  Only if the results are mediocre, then perhaps no one will have anything to talk about.

If there is something here, it should be getting coverage.  Even if its just a story to introduce it, someone is going to want to be close to it, regardless if they have material news or not

Edited by Dwayne Hoover
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

If this news is going to be great, people talk.  There are certainly reporters who have ins at the FDA who are going to find out things.  That nothing has been leaked is insane at this point.  Only if the results are mediocre, then perhaps no one will have anything to talk about.

NP doesn't pass the smell test.  He comes off like a used car salesman. Couple that with the fact that big pharma companies are huge advertisers in all media and you have your answer as to why there's been little/no coverage of CYDY. The FDA has to approve LL and then there will be coverage.  Also, there are dozens of companies saying that they've got a solution for COVID--how is an untrained reporter supposed to parse the good from the bad?

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dwayne Hoover said:

If this news is going to be great, people talk.  There are certainly reporters who have ins at the FDA who are going to find out things.  That nothing has been leaked is insane at this point.  Only if the results are mediocre, then perhaps no one will have anything to talk about.

If there is something here, it should be getting coverage.  Even if its just a story to introduce it, someone is going to want to be close to it, regardless if they have material news or not

I don’t think there are many leaks at the fda. Certainly not to the point where they are discussing results. I’m sure there are journalists aware of the story who will break it when results are out but there is nothing to go to your editor with right now. There just isn’t. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Capella said:

I’m not sure what this means but this is making a big move while Hgen plummets. 

It means you should do as I do instead of following your gut.  :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...