|
Post by JHam on Nov 26, 2014 2:20:41 GMT
Zack's to the rescue, lol. On a pretty good run, maybe we'll even see $.60 today? Nice prediction... on the nose. I just read the CEO's blog and the Zack's article again. Lots of potential here. IMO, the technology is going to have big success turning non-responders into responders. The fact that big pharma is starting to pour money into these promising electroporation companies (not many of them) bodes well for ONCS. I generally try not to put too much weight into these Zack's (insert analyst name) articles, but I agree with this one in how they explained that it is undervalued. And I think they did a good job of breaking down the science and the current situation at ONCS. I definitely won't complain when any analyst raises their target price and makes a headline such as "ONCS Could Make a Big Licensing Deal With Merck" for the whole world to see It looks like 2 analysts raised their target prices (Zack's and Maxim) and one maintained their target price of $2 (Wainwright).
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 26, 2014 2:42:51 GMT
Nice prediction... on the nose. I just read the CEO's blog and the Zack's article again. Lots of potential here. IMO, the technology is going to have big success turning non-responders into responders. The fact that big pharma is starting to pour money into these promising electroporation companies (not many of them) bodes well for ONCS. I generally try not to put too much weight into these Zack's (insert analyst name) articles, but I agree with this one in how they explained that it is undervalued. And I think they did a good job of breaking down the science and the current situation at ONCS. I definitely won't complain when any analyst raises their target price and makes a headline such as "ONCS Could Make a Big Licensing Deal With Merck" for the whole world to see It looks like 2 analysts raised their target prices (Zack's and Maxim) and one maintained their target price of $2 (Wainwright). Lots of cash - 2 years - on the balance sheet. Chart looks good. Looks like it's testing the 200 DMA of around .60 .... would not be surprised to see it break through that in the days/weeks ahead with the additional news coming. This was trading in the .70s in Sept ... hard to imagine it won't get back to those levels on this news and more coming. Bottom line is that the science looks very sound, and its one of those companies where if it works for melanoma (huge market in itself) it can be used to target any other type of tumor. Commercializing as early as 2017 was another thing that has me interested. Phase 2 results (coming in a week or so) is when these biotechs can really start to move. I see a lot of similarities to INO's chart, and what that did after the Roche partnership. Anyway, good due diligence on this one JHam. I've been reading your posts for the past few months as ONCS is in the same market as ADXS. Funny that ADXS' pps did nothing after they announced a similar collaboration with Merck's same PD-1... difference is that ONCS has a much stronger balance sheet, which isn't a barrier to having people buy. The other difference is that ADXS is a listeria based approach, where ONCS is electroporation... and pharma seems to like that technology. I'll trade some of this as it moves higher, but my approach is to hold some of these promising biotechs long and into commercialization. Right now my plan is to build solid positions in ATHX (done), ONCS (done) and OCAT (plan to build that position after the capital raise and before the 1st JV is announced in mid-2015. Will use spikes in ONCS and ATHX to build the position). Having nice positions in 3 promising biotechs (instead of all eggs in 1 basket) is my approach, while concentrating my holdings through trades as key milestones approach for any 1 of the 3.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Nov 26, 2014 15:50:56 GMT
I generally try not to put too much weight into these Zack's (insert analyst name) articles, but I agree with this one in how they explained that it is undervalued. And I think they did a good job of breaking down the science and the current situation at ONCS. I definitely won't complain when any analyst raises their target price and makes a headline such as "ONCS Could Make a Big Licensing Deal With Merck" for the whole world to see It looks like 2 analysts raised their target prices (Zack's and Maxim) and one maintained their target price of $2 (Wainwright). Lots of cash - 2 years - on the balance sheet. Chart looks good. Looks like it's testing the 200 DMA of around .60 .... would not be surprised to see it break through that in the days/weeks ahead with the additional news coming. This was trading in the .70s in Sept ... hard to imagine it won't get back to those levels on this news and more coming. Bottom line is that the science looks very sound, and its one of those companies where if it works for melanoma (huge market in itself) it can be used to target any other type of tumor. Commercializing as early as 2017 was another thing that has me interested. Phase 2 results (coming in a week or so) is when these biotechs can really start to move. I see a lot of similarities to INO's chart, and what that did after the Roche partnership. Anyway, good due diligence on this one JHam. I've been reading your posts for the past few months as ONCS is in the same market as ADXS. Funny that ADXS' pps did nothing after they announced a similar collaboration with Merck's same PD-1... difference is that ONCS has a much stronger balance sheet, which isn't a barrier to having people buy. The other difference is that ADXS is a listeria based approach, where ONCS is electroporation... and pharma seems to like that technology. I'll trade some of this as it moves higher, but my approach is to hold some of these promising biotechs long and into commercialization. Right now my plan is to build solid positions in ATHX (done), ONCS (done) and OCAT (plan to build that position after the capital raise and before the 1st JV is announced in mid-2015. Will use spikes in ONCS and ATHX to build the position). Having nice positions in 3 promising biotechs (instead of all eggs in 1 basket) is my approach, while concentrating my holdings through trades as key milestones approach for any 1 of the 3. Nice post Jckrdu. That is a sound philosophy and similar to what I am trying to do. I don't mind holding core positions in biotechs that show a lot of promise as long as they are into or beyond Phase 2, and as long as the chance of major dilution is minimal. I like the idea of keeping a core position and having a separate trading position so that I can lock in profits on the bumps and add back if it dips back down. ONCS has enough cash to last them through 2016. Some companies will use good news to raise cash, even if they aren't about to run out. However the way Dhillon has talked about their cash position and imposed several times that they have enough cash for two years, I would be very disappointed if they raised cash any time in the next 12 months. Personally I believe the plan is to get good data results from the Phase 2b, and let Merck become our cash cow I agree with the comparison to INO, and think that ONCS is in a much stronger position scientifically than they are. One last thought on where we go from here to the end of the year. If anything, yesterday's news headline and price target upgrades by two out of three analysts was good exposure for investors new to ONCS. They will look and see that there are 4 more major catalysts to happen by years end and hopefully want to take a gamble. It's a good sign to see us holding in the $.60's today with the volume already above the daily average in the first hour of trading.
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Nov 26, 2014 16:27:30 GMT
Very impressed with the DD you've done with this one JHam... You've been right on almost every prediction you've made here. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts as this has made me some good money RLC, it is easy when all I have to do is get the heads up on a Bullard SA article... Seriously though, sometimes I get lucky. Sometimes you have a good thesis for something and it doesn't pan out. Glad that this time it has worked out so far, although it could totally retrace tomorrow and put us back to square one, lol. I still feel comfortable holding though because I do feel that this would be more fairly valued at around $200M ($.82). I am looking to take some profits at $.65 and roll them into NRIFF, but if we hit $.65 before other milestones have been announced I'll likely continue to hold my trading shares as well. We'll see, I am going to be pretty flexible with my trading strategy on this one. Well kudos to Bullard on this one then. Even if it didn't pan out, you've clearly done your homework on this one and have been kind enough to take the time to share your thoughts with everyone here. I greatly appreciate that. With the combined trial expected to begin in the first half of 2015, I might be holding all of my shares for a bit, likely continuing to add on weakness.
|
|
|
Post by jckrdu on Nov 26, 2014 16:43:40 GMT
Lots of cash - 2 years - on the balance sheet. Chart looks good. Looks like it's testing the 200 DMA of around .60 .... would not be surprised to see it break through that in the days/weeks ahead with the additional news coming. This was trading in the .70s in Sept ... hard to imagine it won't get back to those levels on this news and more coming. Bottom line is that the science looks very sound, and its one of those companies where if it works for melanoma (huge market in itself) it can be used to target any other type of tumor. Commercializing as early as 2017 was another thing that has me interested. Phase 2 results (coming in a week or so) is when these biotechs can really start to move. I see a lot of similarities to INO's chart, and what that did after the Roche partnership. Anyway, good due diligence on this one JHam. I've been reading your posts for the past few months as ONCS is in the same market as ADXS. Funny that ADXS' pps did nothing after they announced a similar collaboration with Merck's same PD-1... difference is that ONCS has a much stronger balance sheet, which isn't a barrier to having people buy. The other difference is that ADXS is a listeria based approach, where ONCS is electroporation... and pharma seems to like that technology. I'll trade some of this as it moves higher, but my approach is to hold some of these promising biotechs long and into commercialization. Right now my plan is to build solid positions in ATHX (done), ONCS (done) and OCAT (plan to build that position after the capital raise and before the 1st JV is announced in mid-2015. Will use spikes in ONCS and ATHX to build the position). Having nice positions in 3 promising biotechs (instead of all eggs in 1 basket) is my approach, while concentrating my holdings through trades as key milestones approach for any 1 of the 3. Nice post Jckrdu. That is a sound philosophy and similar to what I am trying to do. I don't mind holding core positions in biotechs that show a lot of promise as long as they are into or beyond Phase 2, and as long as the chance of major dilution is minimal. I like the idea of keeping a core position and having a separate trading position so that I can lock in profits on the bumps and add back if it dips back down. ONCS has enough cash to last them through 2016. Some companies will use good news to raise cash, even if they aren't about to run out. However the way Dhillon has talked about their cash position and imposed several times that they have enough cash for two years, I would be very disappointed if they raised cash any time in the next 12 months. Personally I believe the plan is to get good data results from the Phase 2b, and let Merck become our cash cow I agree with the comparison to INO, and think that ONCS is in a much stronger position scientifically than they are. One last thought on where we go from here to the end of the year. If anything, yesterday's news headline and price target upgrades by two out of three analysts was good exposure for investors new to ONCS. They will look and see that there are 4 more major catalysts to happen by years end and hopefully want to take a gamble. It's a good sign to see us holding in the $.60's today with the volume already above the daily average in the first hour of trading. Good post JHam, agree. Nice to see the strong follow-thru volume today. Looks like the prior resistence at .60 has turned into support. Bullish signs.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Nov 26, 2014 17:27:37 GMT
RLC, it is easy when all I have to do is get the heads up on a Bullard SA article... Seriously though, sometimes I get lucky. Sometimes you have a good thesis for something and it doesn't pan out. Glad that this time it has worked out so far, although it could totally retrace tomorrow and put us back to square one, lol. I still feel comfortable holding though because I do feel that this would be more fairly valued at around $200M ($.82). I am looking to take some profits at $.65 and roll them into NRIFF, but if we hit $.65 before other milestones have been announced I'll likely continue to hold my trading shares as well. We'll see, I am going to be pretty flexible with my trading strategy on this one. Well kudos to Bullard on this one then. Even if it didn't pan out, you've clearly done your homework on this one and have been kind enough to take the time to share your thoughts with everyone here. I greatly appreciate that. With the combined trial expected to begin in the first half of 2015, I might be holding all of my shares for a bit, likely continuing to add on weakness. The comment about Bullard giving me the heads up with an article was a joke since some people on this board are convinced I make my investment decisions based on Bullard's SA articles. Bullard has never written an article on ONCS nor does he have any interest this stock to my knowledge. I hear ya. That is my dilemma right now as well. Not only from the commencement of Phase 2b, but presumably the new trial for the new indication.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Nov 26, 2014 17:55:12 GMT
CEO Punit Dhillion is very active on twitter. Here are his tweets over the last 12 hours...
Punit Dhillon @punitdhillon · 12h
After 9 days in 9 cities & 36 investor/analyst mtgs-I'm looking fwd to going home.Tx for all the support today @oncosec fans! #nevergiveup
Punit Dhillon @punitdhillon · 12h 12 hours ago
Today's @oncosec PR was an important milestone..but we are just getting started & I'm more excited about the R&D ahead in immuno-oncology
I have never been a big fan of CEO's taking to social media, but I must admit, 9 days in 9 cities and 36 investor/analyst meetings got my attention.
|
|
|
Post by RLC on Nov 26, 2014 18:15:22 GMT
Well kudos to Bullard on this one then. Even if it didn't pan out, you've clearly done your homework on this one and have been kind enough to take the time to share your thoughts with everyone here. I greatly appreciate that. With the combined trial expected to begin in the first half of 2015, I might be holding all of my shares for a bit, likely continuing to add on weakness. The comment about Bullard giving me the heads up with an article was a joke since some people on this board are convinced I make my investment decisions based on Bullard's SA articles. Bullard has never written an article on ONCS nor does he have any interest this stock to my knowledge. I hear ya. That is my dilemma right now as well. Not only from the commencement of Phase 2b, but presumably the new trial for the new indication. Haha... gotcha JHam. Hopefully the conversations on this board start to head in a healthier direction. The chasm being created here isn't beneficial to anyone.
|
|
|
Post by happyjawa on Nov 26, 2014 18:36:57 GMT
CEO Punit Dhillion is very active on twitter. Here are his tweets over the last 12 hours... Punit Dhillon @punitdhillon · 12h After 9 days in 9 cities & 36 investor/analyst mtgs-I'm looking fwd to going home.Tx for all the support today @oncosec fans! #nevergiveupPunit Dhillon @punitdhillon · 12h 12 hours agoToday's @oncosec PR was an important milestone..but we are just getting started & I'm more excited about the R&D ahead in immuno-oncologyI have never been a big fan of CEO's taking to social media, but I must admit, 9 days in 9 cities and 36 investor/analyst meetings got my attention. Dhillon's use of social media is comforting to me. Never anything of great substance, but responding to share holders with a, "at the last conference I said..." or a "we'll be updating our website soon!" makes me feel nice. He doesn't say anything that moves the stock, but he's not hiding out in his office either. Good to know that he's alive and running a company. He seems to have a great relationship with his shareholders.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Dec 21, 2014 12:56:54 GMT
I decided to put my horrible jet lag to use this morning, and finally outlined some thoughts I have had in my head about P2b. It seems clear reading J&E's valuation piece and also listening to Dhillon talk and reading his tweets, that T-vec is who we need to be comparing ONCS to and paying most attention to. Here are some interesting tidbits about the AMG/T-Vec combination trial with Merck: - Phase 1/2 trial - 35 trial sites - Estimated enrollment: 110 - Study Start Date: December 2014 - Estimated Study Completion Date: Feb. 2019 - Estimated Primary Completion Date: Nov. 2016 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure) clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02263508?term=AMGEN+melanoma+combination&rank=2www.fiercevaccines.com/story/amgen-tests-t-vecs-combo-potential-trial-mercks-keytruda/2014-12-10AMG has decided to go the longer and broader Phase 1/2 route. At Stifel, Dhillon said that the completion of the Phase 2a extension study and Phase 2b combination study would allow them to move into a registration study by late 2016. www.veracast.com/webcasts/stifel/healthcare2014/69214592.cfm (17:45) Though we don't know the details of ONCS's P2b trial design yet, we do know that they plan to have totally completed the trial by fall of 2016. Most importantly, P2b trials, like ONCS', are specifically designed to test efficacy, while AMG's P1/2 is a safety/tolerability trial. Assuming everything goes smoothly, ONCS will be ready to jump to a pivotal trial by the end of 2016, meanwhile AMG will be moving onto the next stage in P1/2. Even if AMG shows efficacy promise early on, which I imagine they will report, and want to try and skip ahead, they'll likely have to wait until Nov. 2016 (completion of Phase 1) before being able to tweak their protocol. If they decide to halt Phase 1 and skip to a pivotal trial, it will still take time to go through the regulatory process and prepare to launch a broad pivotal trial. Either way, I find it very unlikely that AMG is able to get to a pivotal registration trial prior to ONCS in late 2016. AMG just announced treatment of their first patient on Dec. 10th, 2014 (https://www.nasprx.org/news/206543/Amgen-Initiates-Trial-Combining-its-Immunotherapy-with-Mercks-Keytruda-in-Advanced-Melanoma.htm). If ONCS can treat their first patient in early Q1 as guided, then they will only be a month or two behind AMG, and could very possibly beat AMG to releasing interim data. However, even if that doesn't happen and AMG releases interim data before ONCS, as J&E said about T-vec/Yervoy, AMG will have given us a sneak peak as to what ONCS can expect from their P2b. Even if the market doesn't recognize how that pertains to ONCS, we will at least know. In any event, ONCS would still beat AMG to trial completion. Complete speculation here, but if ONCS is able to show in an efficacy study of 20-50 patients that the combination of ImmunoPulse and Keytruda increase ORR to 75% and above, I can't see how Phase 3 won't have some type of breakthrough/fast-tracking status attached to it. Thanks for letting me think out loud.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Dec 21, 2014 15:28:46 GMT
Here is another snippet from Dhillon from Stifel in regard to Phase 2b that caught my attention (13:50):
"So what we're looking to do is show that anti-PD-1 non-responders represent this tremendous opportunity of addressing a huge unmet medical need in the oncology space. And Immunopulse has the answer for this particular population. Particularly because the response to anti-PD-1 in melanoma correlates with this increase of certain immune cells that need to be present in the environment in order for PD-1 to work."
If you listen to it, he confidently states; "And Immunopulse has the answer for this particular population." He doesn't say, "we think we may be able to..." or, "there is a good chance we can...". He says "ImmunoPulse has the answer...". Not trying to get too pumpy here, but they know they know this is going to work. I know many already believe that ImmunoPulse is the answer, but it is nice to hear it from the horse's mouth.
|
|
|
Post by JHam on Dec 21, 2014 15:32:45 GMT
By the way. He also mentions how they expect the Phase 2a extension trial to ultimately increase efficacy results from what they have released so far since they will be escalating and optimizing the dosing amount. Again, those results are expected at the end of 2016.
|
|