Robert Fabian

Robert Fabian
Contributor since: 2012
" Robert, it surprises me that a donor mitochondria is acceptable to you while a mother's own mitochondria is not? Did UK just not pass the legislation for donor mitochondria?"
What are you talking about? The UK legislation was dealing with preventing "inherited mitochondrial diseases". The Augment procedures purpose is nothing to do with that. Ovascience unsubstantiated claim is that by manipulating the egg they can give it an "energy bust" thus increasing the womans chance of giving birth. This is what i don't find acceptable.
"I am not discrediting FDA for regulating treatments, but sometimes we need to step back and judge whether there is merit in asking for a multi year extensive study when it may not be necessary."
I'm shocked that people like you think a procedure, that manipulates a womans egg, should not be approved via a large rigorous safety/efficacy clincial trial. Thankfully people like you aren't running the FDA.
"It's just a matter of few months to prove whether the naysayers were right. The first baby is on its way. "
So when the first baby is born it is proof that the Augment procedure worked? Did it ever occur to you that the IVF procedure, which the woman also underwent, had given her nearly the SAME chance of giving birth? And this is based off tiny trial data for the Augment treatment which is worthless from a statistical viewpoint. Nah sure it's definitely the new unproven unregulated LAST RESORT treatment that helped those DESPERATE women. What a money maker. :(
"Particularly its not worthwhile for OVAS to invest their time & effort in IND and subsequent studies as 90% of IVF treatments are done outside US"
A new procedure that involves the manipulation of a womans eggs should not even go through a large rigorous clinical trial? Why bother when you can sell this "last resort" treatment - to DESPERATE people - unregulated in other countries.
"I hope that FDA relaxes their concerns given the huge benefit to the women who are struggling to conceive."
This was a tiny trial sample size. There is NO WAY to say from a statistical viewpoint there was any benefit. Thankfully the FDA are very concerned with this NEW treatment.
Covered all my shares the last 2 days. One of my best short trades ever. Thank you to Joe Natural, Joe Springer and James Burke for all your pumping. Hopefully you all learned a valuable lesson. RF
"If KNDI is not trying to take advantage of shareholders, then KNDI needs to clarify the EV parts business, stop with fluff PRs, have conference calls, get real analyst coverage, and have a responsive IR department."
All of this and you were still LONG until you read the last 10-Q recently. ;) I love a good short story but can't stand charlatans like you. You're the reason people hate shorts. Stick to the facts Ben.
Best,
Robert
"Robert, the fact remains .... I can out trade you blindfolded."
You don't know me from Adam yet it doesn't seem to stop you from making an adsurd statement like this. Clearly there is something wrong with you and this is even more apparent by your constant need to be right when you are clearly wrong. Your ADMP articles lacked the most basic understanding of the workings of a small development stage biotech like ADMP and this is why only people like you were surprised at the shelf filing. You've so much to learn JoesNatural but people like you will never strive to learn more because you are too busy telling others how great you are and how you made 100% in one of the greatest Bull markets of our time. It's laughable. :)
"$50M shelf gets them ready to sell at their price and the amount they want when and if they need to."
No, it gets them ready to sell at what ever price they can get as determined by the capital markets.
Management will dilute this stock into oblivion. IMO.
" Robert, I just happen to be honest about my trades and position on a stock. I knew the 10-K was coming and that it wouldn't be viewed favorably cash-position wise. While some may want to buy and hold, that's not me, especially after the webcast turned out to be an event where questions could not be asked."
Honest? LOL. On 18th June (post-webcast) you said "First buy here at $5.10 because ......I didn't see the flush I was expecting when the stock traded briefly below $5.00....but will scale back in (as always) starting down here". Then a few days later you expect readers to believe you "Sold ALL". You're a joke and you're craving for credibility is embarrassing. :)
"Sold ALL of my $5.10's at $5.33"
Just last week this poster said:
"First buy here at $5.10 because ......I didn't see the flush I was expecting when the stock traded briefly below $5.00 ..... I sold my last position at $5.42 after the webcast that I was disappointed with, but will scale back in (as always) starting down here, solely on valuation basis and call I had with IR's Mark Flather."
JoesNaturals posts are laughable. He has zero credibility. :)
"He may also be a hired gun for a competitor.."
ROTFLMAO!! Trust me when i tell you this - NO ONE cares what Adamis are doing now or what they plan to do in the future.
"He may be short the stock but that does not seem to be worth the risk @ these levels..."
ADMP will be trading in the $3's just before they start the Pivotal Clincial Trial for the Taper DPI. IMO.
Management will DILUTE this stock into oblivion. They NEED $10m for the new molds BEFORE they can begin the pivotal trial for the Taper DPI device. This does not include any trial expenses. Chances of upfront payment from a partner are tiny. IMO.

One of the most HYPED stocks on the chat boards currently. Keep drinking the koolaid.
"that sure was a huge vote of confidence them partnering with ADMP"
No profit sharing, royalties, upfront payment or milestones constitutes a partnership to you? They just buy tape off of 3M. Partnership!!! lol.
I'm off but i'll be back to remind everyone of the DILUTION that will be coming down the line. IMO.
" So when you can't answer a question you just start spamming a new string?"
Why don't you ask 3M why they sold the device for PITTANCE and why they didn't even bother to test it in a POC clinical trial like they do with all there other devices. In fact you will see one of the in vivo results PR's back in 2011 that they have planned further testing in human trials but they obviously didn't want to bother and sold it instead for PITTANCE. Your talking about a product that MAY get approved in 3 years by a company who has no experience of bringing a product through clinical trials and dealing with the FDA (oh wait they already felt the wrath of the FDA). Also 3M also had the option to invest in this company on the cheap and they walked away.
"Take it to the Yahoo boards."
Are you kidding me? You don't even bother to tell the FULL story. Funding is the life blood of a small development stage biotech like this one. The talk of a partnership is all spiel. They need 10's of millions going forward and the capital markets is where they will have to get it. IMO. This notion that they'll just do a POC trial and viola a partner with upfront money will come is ridiculous. Of course the management "believe" it so it must be going to happen. Geez if i had a penny ..... :)
Management will DILUTE this stock into oblivion. They NEED $10m for the new molds BEFORE they can begin the pivotal trial for the Taper DPI device. This does not include any trial expenses. Chances of upfront payment from a partner are tiny. IMO.
Keep drinking the koolaid.
"1) At no time did management suggest that manufacturing costs would be zero. Are you suggesting that the device should have no manufacturing costs? Or that the molds would be thrown in the trash after the trial"
A simple YES would have sufficed. Thank you for clarifying that the company will NEED $10m BEFORE they can begin the pivotal trial.
"2) Y.E.S."
Good luck with that. :)
"Is that you in the mugshot?"
Ad hominem attacks are a sign of weakness. Thanks for the laugh though.
" They need, and have, half a million to do the POC, not $10 million, where do you get sidestep?"
Mea culpa. They NEED $10m to create new molds for the Taper DPI device BEFORE they can begin the pivotal clinical trial. Yes that's right i forgot to put "pivotal" in front of the words "clinical trial". Please move on cause i know you're going to use this faux pas as a way to side-step this important issue again.
Please clarify for your readers that management talked about this $10m for creating the new molds that you never mentioned in your article? Also are you somehow saying that a partner will fund this through an upfront payment based on a tiny POC trial?
2 simple questions that require 2 simple answers.
"As an investor, I am open to and can respect different opinions. Just keep it to the facts."
You mean the fact that this companies products MAY get approved and MAY generate decent sales if approved? Sure it's also a fact that this companies products MAY never get approved and even if they do they MAY never generate meaningful sales. It's all semantics. There is NOTHING DEFINITIVE going forward but sure you'd never know reading this article.
Keep drinking the koolaid.
"2) I made no mention of marketing any way except for a partnership, which makes the most sense by far, did you catch that part over and over?"
What's with the side-step? I was talking about the $10m they will need for the molds BEFORE the clincial trial for the Taper DPI device can even begin. I'd consider this one of the most important immediate issues facing this company yet you somehow left it out. ;)
"IMO opinion you did not read my article critically or are short or have nothing to better to do with your time."
Actually i'd argue you have nothing better to do then write a bunch of speculative words on a company. How many times do SA readers have to read the same things regurgitated over and over.
1)"PFS needs no trial, Taper is 2 trials from submission, 1000 is 1 trial from submission, your comment is irrelevant"
My comment was alluding to the fact that they have minimal cash burn at the moment. All of that changes if/when they decide to test Taper and 1000.
2) "Do enlighten us with specifics"
You mean like the fact that they need $10m alone to make the molds for the Taper DPI device. This does not include the cost of running the trial. How come no mention of the molds in your article?
3) "Wrong, read the article and then give us your version"
It's wrong because you said differently in your article? I happen to think they won't get approval till 2017 at the earliest. Small development stage biotechs like this one are notorious for not meeting timelines.
4) "Wrong, read the article and then make your case"
The product does what other products on the market do i.e. gives you a shot of epinephrine. That's the definition of a me-too product.
"Thank you for sharing your opinion, can you argue the points in the article?"
You think that because you used points for emphasis in your article it means something. IMO your article was a load of speculative noise.
Keep drinking the koolaid.
They currently have 1 active early stage clinical trial. If they plan to do only HALF of what this article says they will need to raise 10's of millions. Earliest they MAY get approval for the Taper DPI is 3 years (all going perfect). The Epinephrine Pre-Filled Syringe is a me-too product that will be marketed by some nobody company with minimal sales experience. I would be shocked if they made any decent money with this product. So other then going to capital markets all they can do is try to partner. I'd give them a .01% chance of getting a deal with decent upfront payment. Then again the market for these products/drugs are in the BILLIONNNNSSSSSSSS so BP will be knocking the door down right? lol
Management will DILUTE this stock into oblivion. Keep drinking the koolaid.
Keep drinking that koolaid. Management will dilute this stock into oblivion. Guaranteed!!!
"I've seen this for years, the parent company makes those adjustments per its costs, etc, etc, and normally, it comes out to 10% when everything is said and done."
So magically it comes back to the 10% figure you posted in the article. You clearly didn't know about the tiered royalty rate and are covering your tracks now. You look foolish.
"Basically, I would love to look at the actual license agreement. Can you provide me a link to that?"
You already know the answer to that so stop the nonsense.
"So Pozen gets a royalty from Sanofi, but how much? Standard royalty rate here would be best case scenario of 10% according to the best of my research on this issue."
Clearly you've done cursory research on Pozen as the royalty rate has been discussed many times and is found in their 10-Q:
"The Company will also receive tiered royalties ranging from 12.5% to 22.5% on sales of licensed products by Sanofi US, its affiliates and its sublicensees in the United States, subject to certain adjustments specified in the license agreement."
Much better shorts then this. IMO
"You are correct that Adamis intends to run a POC"
Yes that's why the product is NOT proven yet.
"More importantly your conclusion that in one case 3M is jealously hoarding a device while in the other it cast it adrift is totally fallacious (as admittedly was my responsive theory of 3M incenting Radius)."
Adamis bought the rights to 3Ms Taper DPI technology for $10m while Radius signed an agreement with 3M to develop their product with 3Ms patented TD technology. In one agreement 3M are giving up all rights to the technology while in the other they continue to have all rights to the technology. This speaks volumes on how 3M sees the potential of the Taper DPI technology. IMO.
Also this "sure it's all about the Tape Supply Agreement" is a complete red herring. IMO.
Adamis are going to need a lot of funds going forward and they will be going to the capital markets for them. Major dilution ahead. IMO.
"The protocol is easier enough that apparently it does not include a POC"
Arghhhhhhhhhh. All companies run a POC trial in order to see if the product might be effective first. Companies don't just jump into Phase 3 trials blind. The paid research report even outlined this.
"Why did 3M not agree to commercialize the APC-5000 product? Because it's pretty clear it isn't required."
Sure who needs an experienced Sales and Marketing team like 3M have. Pretty clear a no product, no salesforce company like Adamis is ready for the bigtime and 3M will make lots of money off the tape. LOL.
"You have ignored the dynamic I gave viz. 3M incenting Radius to progress much riskier Phase II development while they conserve their resources for their upcoming Phase III trial."
I ignored it because i have no idea what you're on about. Radius signed an agreement with 3M for a transdermal patch for their product. They currently have an ongoing trial for an injection version of the same product. Looks like Radius are smart developing an injection-free version of their product with 3M as a collaborator. If you think 3M only signed up because they thought Radius needed their help then i disagree vehemently. 3M could have just collaborated on the development side yet they chose to collaborate on the commercial side also. It's obvious to me Adamis need lots of help on the commercial side of things.
"Sorry, but I don't regard lightly 3M agreeing to let Adamis take 3M research and development staff whose personal development they spent years nurturing."
So basically 3M are saying that their employees are free to leave and go work for Adamis. So tell me again how that is a good thing for 3M? Looks like another case of 3M washing there hands of anything associated with this product.
In all seriousness you really need to get this notion that the upcoming trials for Adamis product will be less rigourous because it is completely ridiculous.
"Can you speak to the cash burn?"
Cash burn is minimal at the moment because they only have 1 ongoing trial for an early stage drug. One of the paid for research notes said they will need nearly $18m to run the Phase 3 trial for APC-5000 alone. IMO there are many offerings coming down the road.
"Exactly, and that's why I wrote my post to you, after you'd written five.....balance, lol."
My posts don't even come close to balancing out the hyperbolic nonsense that is being posted on SA and the rest of the web.
Have a good day too!
"3M wants to encourage the more novel transdermal microneedle development requiring trials under very rigorous FDA protocols vs Adamis delivering branded generic via a proven device and subject to much less rigorous FDA protocols."
The FDA has made the pathway to approval easier recently but if you think that implies the protocols for the APC-5000 Phase 3 trial will be less rigourous then you don't understand the bureaucratic FDA. Also this device is NOT proven so i've no idea where you got that from. The pre-clinical trials are exactly that, pre-clincial. They haven't even run a POC trial yet.
"If you read the agreement between 3M and Adamis (which you obviously haven't) you will see that Adamis even has the right to hire the 3M people that developed the Taper device so there is a degree of collaboration that runs deeper than you suspect."
Adamis bought the device off of 3M who spent years R&Ding it so of course they are made available for "hire". On the other hand 3M and Radius will work to develop and commercialize their product. Why did 3M not agree to commercialize the APC-5000 product?
""i can think of umpteen business reasons"
This isn't twitter so no limit on what you can say. Please feel free to share everything.
"Current data indicates this platform technology has the potential to be compatible with a wide range of formulations; so add-in gross margin from supplying the tape delivery for all other drugs using the DPI technology."
It will take Adamis another 3.5 years minimum to get to a stage where they may get approval for the APC-5000 product yet you are already talking about other drugs?
"Some of us don't have the same viewpoint as you"
That's what makes a market. I'm all for hearing both sides of a story.
"3M stands to profit from the tape that they manufacture...I would say that means Adamis is sharing part of the profits with 3M."
I'm was referring to an agreement whereby Adamis would be obligated to share part of their profits with 3M. What you are talking about is something completely different.
"I think they think they have the potential to sell a lot of expensive tape, which is after all the business that they are in."
3M are in the business of making money, be it tape or the host of other products they sell. They sold the Taper DPI technology to a company with limited experience in bringing products through the FDA process, limited manufacuting capabilities and more importantly, limited resources. It is obvious to me that there was no demand from other potential acquirers for this technology.
Here's an example of a collaboration update where 3M signed an agreement to help develop and commercialize a product using 3M's drug delivery system.
http://bit.ly/1g6UC3u
"On the other hand, 3M did have the right to accept $14 Million in stock in lieu of the $7,000,000 closing payment and did not exercise it."
Yet another indicator of how 3M feels about the potential of this device. Thank you for highlighting this. :)