I agree we won’t know, but brining it up is impo
Post# of 263
(Total Views: 1563)
Posted On: 08/25/2025 2:21:09 PM
I agree we won’t know, but brining it up is important.
I’ve seen the chatter about “creeper buyers” and figured I’d lay out where I stand.
First off, the numbers by themselves don’t look huge. Most days this month we’ve had a little over 2M shares in volume. That’s only about $600K total. Even the 500K blocks everyone watches are only about $150K a piece. That’s not “whale” money by any stretch. You don’t need a hedge fund or pharma giant to put that kind of cash to work.
That said, creeper accumulation isn’t about whales showing up with fireworks. It’s the exact opposite, it’s about staying quiet, blending in, and never triggering attention until you’ve already got the position you want. To a fund or strategic buyer, dropping $150K blocks day after day is pocket change, but over weeks and months it adds up to something real. By design, it looks boring in real time. You only see it clearly later, when someone files or surfaces.
Some of this could just be market makers smoothing out liquidity. They aggregate small orders and print blocks so Fife’s selling doesn’t tank the price. But the timing is what makes people suspicious. Why do these blocks keep showing up right when Fife paper hits, or when retail is buzzing around news? If it was just random order flow, you’d expect it to be scattered. Instead, it often lines up perfectly with “events,” which looks more like someone wants to make sure the supply gets absorbed cleanly.
On the 5% point… true, no one has crossed the barrier yet. And Welch is somewhere right around that line, either just above or just below. 5% of 1.2B shares is ~60M shares, about $18M at these prices. But a smart creeper doesn’t need to rush past 5%. They can sit at 4.9% forever, or use multiple vehicles and swaps to stay under the reporting threshold until they’re ready. The lack of a filing doesn’t mean no one’s building, it actually fits the playbookk!.
Here’s why this matters, if it’s just retail nibbling, shorts can relax. If it’s a structured buyer soaking every dip, shorts get trapped. That possibility alone changes the risk calculus. The tape right now is ambiguous enough that both sides can argue their case, but the consistent absorption of Fife paper without price collapse is exactly the kind of footprint a creeper buyer would leave.
So yeah, $150K blocks by themselves don’t scream “whale,” but creepers never look like whales until it’s already done. That’s the entire point.
Unless we have the OBO list we won’t ever know!
The FTDs I’ve pulled and the audit the SEC has alone shows there are a ton of short shares here that are naked.
I’ve seen the chatter about “creeper buyers” and figured I’d lay out where I stand.
First off, the numbers by themselves don’t look huge. Most days this month we’ve had a little over 2M shares in volume. That’s only about $600K total. Even the 500K blocks everyone watches are only about $150K a piece. That’s not “whale” money by any stretch. You don’t need a hedge fund or pharma giant to put that kind of cash to work.
That said, creeper accumulation isn’t about whales showing up with fireworks. It’s the exact opposite, it’s about staying quiet, blending in, and never triggering attention until you’ve already got the position you want. To a fund or strategic buyer, dropping $150K blocks day after day is pocket change, but over weeks and months it adds up to something real. By design, it looks boring in real time. You only see it clearly later, when someone files or surfaces.
Some of this could just be market makers smoothing out liquidity. They aggregate small orders and print blocks so Fife’s selling doesn’t tank the price. But the timing is what makes people suspicious. Why do these blocks keep showing up right when Fife paper hits, or when retail is buzzing around news? If it was just random order flow, you’d expect it to be scattered. Instead, it often lines up perfectly with “events,” which looks more like someone wants to make sure the supply gets absorbed cleanly.
On the 5% point… true, no one has crossed the barrier yet. And Welch is somewhere right around that line, either just above or just below. 5% of 1.2B shares is ~60M shares, about $18M at these prices. But a smart creeper doesn’t need to rush past 5%. They can sit at 4.9% forever, or use multiple vehicles and swaps to stay under the reporting threshold until they’re ready. The lack of a filing doesn’t mean no one’s building, it actually fits the playbookk!.
Here’s why this matters, if it’s just retail nibbling, shorts can relax. If it’s a structured buyer soaking every dip, shorts get trapped. That possibility alone changes the risk calculus. The tape right now is ambiguous enough that both sides can argue their case, but the consistent absorption of Fife paper without price collapse is exactly the kind of footprint a creeper buyer would leave.
So yeah, $150K blocks by themselves don’t scream “whale,” but creepers never look like whales until it’s already done. That’s the entire point.
Unless we have the OBO list we won’t ever know!
The FTDs I’ve pulled and the audit the SEC has alone shows there are a ton of short shares here that are naked.
(1)
(0)Vg Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) Stock Research Links
investigations@firegatebioscience.com
Other encrypted emails available upon request.
Leronlimab (a CCR5 mAb) has very low toxicity, especially compared to most HIV drugs.
• That makes it feasible to use in higher doses (700 mg+) or in combination strategies without the safety trade-offs that normally kill “cure” attempts.
⸻
???? CCR5 Δ32 insight
• People with the CCR5 Δ32 mutation (homozygous) are famously resistant to HIV infection.
• Blocking CCR5 with a drug is essentially a therapeutic mimic of that genetic protection.
• This is why the Berlin and London “cured” patients (via stem cell transplant with Δ32 donor cells) proved the concept. Leronlimab just does it non-genetically.
⸻
???? The “hot and cold” latency angle
• PD-L1 inhibition (immune checkpoint blockade) can “wake up” latent HIV reservoirs — the so-called shock and kill approach.
• CCR5 blockade (Leronlimab) prevents new infection pathways and stabilizes immune recovery once those reservoirs are exposed.
• Combined, it’s like flipping the light switch (PD-L1 wakes hidden HIV) and then locking the doors (CCR5 blockade stops spread and allows clearance).
⸻
⚡ Why this is so dangerous for FDA/industry
It’s not exotic science. It’s brutally simple:
• Low-toxicity CCR5 blockade (Leronlimab) + latency reversal agents (PD-L1 or similar) = a functional cure path.
• The only way to make that fail is to underdose, mis-design trials, or bury combo data.
Other encrypted emails available upon request.
Leronlimab (a CCR5 mAb) has very low toxicity, especially compared to most HIV drugs.
• That makes it feasible to use in higher doses (700 mg+) or in combination strategies without the safety trade-offs that normally kill “cure” attempts.
⸻
???? CCR5 Δ32 insight
• People with the CCR5 Δ32 mutation (homozygous) are famously resistant to HIV infection.
• Blocking CCR5 with a drug is essentially a therapeutic mimic of that genetic protection.
• This is why the Berlin and London “cured” patients (via stem cell transplant with Δ32 donor cells) proved the concept. Leronlimab just does it non-genetically.
⸻
???? The “hot and cold” latency angle
• PD-L1 inhibition (immune checkpoint blockade) can “wake up” latent HIV reservoirs — the so-called shock and kill approach.
• CCR5 blockade (Leronlimab) prevents new infection pathways and stabilizes immune recovery once those reservoirs are exposed.
• Combined, it’s like flipping the light switch (PD-L1 wakes hidden HIV) and then locking the doors (CCR5 blockade stops spread and allows clearance).
⸻
⚡ Why this is so dangerous for FDA/industry
It’s not exotic science. It’s brutally simple:
• Low-toxicity CCR5 blockade (Leronlimab) + latency reversal agents (PD-L1 or similar) = a functional cure path.
• The only way to make that fail is to underdose, mis-design trials, or bury combo data.