Here's a comparison. Market cap 52.6 Million.
Post# of 72445
(Total Views: 232)
Posted On: 04/09/2018 5:24:11 PM
Here's a comparison.
Market cap 52.6 Million. Not a single clinical trial. In existence years longer than IPIX/CTIX. No significant cash position.
Market cap 85.37 million. Multiple successful clinical trials for 3 different drugs with multiple conditions to treat. Some cash, essentially no debt.
So, which one is the market valuing fairly? The one with successful clinical trials and no debt, or the one with NO clinical trials that the "market" values at 62% of the value of the successful-clinical-trials stock?
Well, I guess if I have a choice between NNVC with their decades-long history of promising they're just about to start clinical trials that then never happen, and IPIX with its multiple clinical trials, I choose IPIX.
And I think that example shows you why the "market" valuations should not be trusted. NNVC is not worth as much as its market cap would indicate.
IPIX is worth much, much more.
As far as AXON, with its clinical trial failures, that is a very poor example.
It's valued at much more than its cash on hand, and it has NO drug that looks like it's going to be successful. So buy that stock, and you're buying a 50-cent piece with every dollar.
Also remember that AXON had a 2 Billion dollar market cap at its IPO, when its only intellectual property was an Alzheimer's drug they bought for 5 million dollars after it failed clinical trials. Market cap now: 122.9 Million.
Do you think the fact that Wall Street insiders created the firm and rushed it to the IPO, and Jim Cramer was touting it to his faithful sheep, might have something to do with the action on that stock? Would you really trust them to put a fair value on a stock? Because they sure didn't with AXON.
Market cap 52.6 Million. Not a single clinical trial. In existence years longer than IPIX/CTIX. No significant cash position.
Market cap 85.37 million. Multiple successful clinical trials for 3 different drugs with multiple conditions to treat. Some cash, essentially no debt.
So, which one is the market valuing fairly? The one with successful clinical trials and no debt, or the one with NO clinical trials that the "market" values at 62% of the value of the successful-clinical-trials stock?
Well, I guess if I have a choice between NNVC with their decades-long history of promising they're just about to start clinical trials that then never happen, and IPIX with its multiple clinical trials, I choose IPIX.
And I think that example shows you why the "market" valuations should not be trusted. NNVC is not worth as much as its market cap would indicate.
IPIX is worth much, much more.
As far as AXON, with its clinical trial failures, that is a very poor example.
It's valued at much more than its cash on hand, and it has NO drug that looks like it's going to be successful. So buy that stock, and you're buying a 50-cent piece with every dollar.
Also remember that AXON had a 2 Billion dollar market cap at its IPO, when its only intellectual property was an Alzheimer's drug they bought for 5 million dollars after it failed clinical trials. Market cap now: 122.9 Million.
Do you think the fact that Wall Street insiders created the firm and rushed it to the IPO, and Jim Cramer was touting it to his faithful sheep, might have something to do with the action on that stock? Would you really trust them to put a fair value on a stock? Because they sure didn't with AXON.
(3)
(0)