Seeking Alpha

Bryce_in_TX

Bryce_in_TX
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Bryce_in_TX's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    "I'm only talking actual numbers Galena is changing. I do not know if they were correct at RXi or correct now. I know they have changed. Numbers like, but not limited to: 200K new cases is now 230K. 24K qualifying cases is now 103,500."

    The 230,000 cases, I assume you are referring to Galena's statement on page 5 of their 2013 10-k which states:

    "According to the National Cancer Institute, over 230,000 women in the U.S. are diagnosed with breast cancer annually."

    http://1.usa.gov/1dehUsU

    If you research that number, you will see that is the current estimate for 2014. There are a number of sites that use this number:

    "The American Cancer Society’s estimates for breast cancer in women in the United States for 2014 are:

    About 232,570 new cases of invasive breast cancer"

    http://bit.ly/1ph5Jgx

    http://bit.ly/1ph5Jgy

    As far as the number of women who qualify for Nuevax, was that what you were referring to? (not clear when you don't provide the quote and link to source) Galena's own numbers from page 5 of their 10-K states:

    "NeuVax is a targeted cancer immunotherapy for approximately 30,000-40,000 of the 230,000 breast cancer patients annually diagnosed in the US who are at high risk of their breast cancer recurring,"

    So, I don't see a 103,500. Without a reference to your source I have no idea where you pulled that number from.

    Clearly GALE is not making up the 230,000 number, as you seem to infer.

    You assert that they reworded their Phase III Present Trial at their site, but fail to show what was reworded or provide links. Those are assertions without any authority to back them up. I can't take your word for things. I have to have the sources to evaluate them. Surely you are smart enough to understand that.
    Mar 28 07:11 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • What Seeking Alpha Is Doing To Prevent Paid Stock Promotion [View article]
    Note from the disclaimer below:

    "Note: We have received monetary compensation to perform investor relations services for AdCare Health Systems (ADK). Readers should be aware that this compensation may indicate a potential bias in the material presented."

    http://seekingalpha.co...

    Yet you say:

    "To be clear: Seeking Alpha does not allow paid stock promoters or IR firms to submit articles about stocks with which they have a relationship."

    Can you explain the apparent contradiction?
    Mar 28 05:44 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • What Seeking Alpha Is Doing To Prevent Paid Stock Promotion [View article]
    "To be clear: Seeking Alpha does not allow paid stock promoters or IR firms to submit articles about stocks with which they have a relationship."

    With all the DreamTeam Group paid promotion and all the articles pulled from SA as a result, why is Mission IR, part of the DreamTeam Group, still allowed on SA?

    Note, Mission IR and GALE had a marketing contract. Their posts about GALE are still up. Why? Because it's an intablog and not a contributor article?

    http://bit.ly/O8AoPV

    http://bit.ly/O8AU0i

    http://bit.ly/1ezvwbJ

    http://bit.ly/1hC2Cdd

    http://bit.ly/1hC2Cts

    http://bit.ly/1hC2Ctv
    Mar 28 05:25 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena faces the obligatory lawsuits [View news story]
    "It's a complete pump and dump."

    Show me where the "pump" comes from. Correlate the stock price with whatever it is you claim pumped the price, with dates. Show me.

    " The 10k talks about this extensively and also "mentions" that they may have broken Sarbanes-Oxley.

    Highly recommend you pore over the 10k line by line. Not a pretty picture."

    For any accusations, present the quotes from the source, with links to the source.

    "is based on "open source" peptides so will be a generic at best."

    A claim with no support. Please back up the claim with authoritative support. I'm not a 6 year old who believes everything anyone says. I'm also not a Biology or Bio-Chem major. Lay folks need a lot more info than what you are providing to understand if your claim has any merit.

    And this is your first post. Now isn't that special.
    Mar 28 04:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    "Now that there have been multiple delays and difficulty enrolling is this $2 Billion in 2022, 2019, 2030?"

    Please provide evidence of multiple delays. You are making a claim but providing no evidence of the accusation. I'm not interested in accusations with no support to validate them. Where is the support?
    Where is the proof that they are having difficulty enrolling patients? I addressed this already with Enhydris. See my post below:

    http://bit.ly/1mxTbma

    " They engaged 158 locations. Do you believe that the 48 sites in Russia/Ukraine are guaranteed?
    What happens when Russia terminates regulatory with the US over Ukraine? Simferpol is already down, 2 weeks into havoc.
    How do you meet enrollment when the CRO chose to locate nearly 33% of sites in this region?"

    The 48 sites in Russia are a concern. However, have the sites closed due to Russian-American friction? Will they close?
    As far as meeting enrollment, with the possibility of these sites being closed, it depends upon how many patients are enrolled from those areas and how many patients are enrolled from the 110 other sites. Do we have numbers? I think some of your arguments are an over reaction to the Russian situation, i.e. a bear argument that potentially has less credibility than it appears on the surface. You are seeking to borrow trouble where none may exist.

    " The FDA requires a minimum 25% in the US,"

    A minimum 25% of what, patients from the U.S. or sites in the U.S.? Again, quoting your source and providing a link to it is absolutely necessary in evaluating the credibility of your statements. I am not going to take your word for anything without some authority backing it up.
    Mar 28 04:52 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    "The reason I am spending time on this: Because of the ferocious bullying against anyone questioning, stating facts in disagreement, or losing faith in GALE."

    If you get it wrong on easy to verify FACTs, like the SPA has already been issued, and then you state and continue to state that the EARLIEST outcome of the trial is 2022, you can bet that I am going to correct you. That is not bullying, it is simply correcting inaccuracies.

    And by continuing to state the earliest outcome of the Phase III Trial is 2022, AFTER you have been shown the FACTS that the primary outcome results of the Phase III trial will be in 2015 with a link to where it states that, you can bet your posts are going to be met with more aggressive statements BECAUSE you are viewed as being not credible and as spreading lies.

    And then you reference Enhydris, who has been discredited due to his legal problems and his now defunct C Corp. whose address is shared by 2400 or business entities in, NV I think it was. Simply not a credible source.

    As I said before, but you still are not doing:

    "If you are going to make statements about what a reference, such as the 10-K, states I would suggest quoting the reference, including a link to it, so that everyone can evaluate the credibility of your statement."
    Mar 28 02:35 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    I don't give you one ounce of credibility due to your prior inaccurate statements. Not gonna hunt for what you accuse GALE of. Present accusations, supported with links, making your arguments crystal clear or forget it. No clue what CRO is. Pretend I am a 12 or 14 year old. I need things very basic and simple. As of now, your claims are baseless, there is nothing you have posted to support them.
    Mar 28 02:06 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Realty Income: Buy The Dip? [View article]
    http://1.usa.gov/1pcVfP6

    Type in "O" at this page and you'll get all the SEC info.

    http://1.usa.gov/1dwmh28

    It's not like they are trying to hide it.
    Mar 27 01:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Realty Income: Buy The Dip? [View article]
    I think Barnes & Noble, Borders (now bankrupt), and Best Buy have all suffered from Amazon or Ebay. I don't see pharmacies in that group, however. A pharmacist is always needed for customers/patients, a critical spoke in the wheel between doctor and patient, IMO, though meds a person is on long term can be cheaper by mail. There are ways pharmacies can improve their gross margins and revenues such as compounding and increasing in store traffic through testing, such as cholesterol screenings, flu shots, etc. The independent pharmacy I worked for increased its bottom line very substantially through compounding.
    Mar 27 01:54 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Realty Income: Buy The Dip? [View article]
    Nice article, I like "O" very much. However, when interest rates start to rise again, I would anticipate seeing "O" 's share price decline to an extent again as it did several months ago. I wouldn't buy it over $38. I would wait until it hits $38 or lower.
    Mar 27 10:18 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Realty Income Corporation Announces Commencement Of Public Offering Of Common Stock [View article]
    I initially bought in at $37.86, Nov. 2012, and got another 25 shares at $37.75. I should have bought more then. Have enjoyed the divi all along the way. I wouldn't buy in at higher than $38, but I love "O" as a long term investment. At $40/share I'm still up $250 on principal, plus 5.75% divis. Brad Thomas recommended it at $35 around Nov. 2012. The divi keeps going up over time, meaning the share price will rise over time. Dilution? Depends on where you bought it at. I think "O" is a great long term investment at $38 or lower.

    Another I like is OHI at $29 to $30. I'll be looking to start a retirement account for my son with both stocks in another year or so, as soon as I get some medical bills paid off.
    Mar 27 03:53 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    Bears also want to compare cancer patients with breakthrough pain to street drug addicts. That is disgusting, to seek to shame individuals going through horrendous pain which none of us could conceive of what it is like without walking in their shoes.

    These patients need relief of legitimate suffering. According to the literature I have read, it is rare for such patients to become addicted to the opiods administered for pain relief.

    Street drug addicts are addicted. Addiction is compulsive use of drugs for nonmedical reasons; it is characterized by a craving for mood altering drug effects, not pain relief.

    The attempt to equate both groups as the same is simply disgusting and shows a lack of objectivity and a lack of compassion. They simply want to win an argument and will stoop as low as they think they need to to try and win. They are the lowest of the low in my book. Scum.
    Mar 25 04:31 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    I have no problem with your analysis. It's still very different from the bears who claim it has no efficacy whatsoever. We'll have to wait for the results of the Phase III trial to see if that study's primary objectives are achieved. I don't believe the docs are in collusion with GALE management to distort or massage the results. There appears to be effectiveness of the vaccine, but not at the level of P = .05 or less in the Phase II trial. Bears say it's not effective at all, which is a lie, IMO.
    Mar 25 04:10 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    Alex,

    "One patient is clearly relevant when we are talking 4 patients versus 5 being the difference between statistical significance and not."

    Would you please provide a link to the sub-group you are referring to?
    Mar 24 10:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena: Setting The Record Straight [View article]
    Galena played by DTG? Doubtful, IMO. When your inhouse marketing team reviews marketing before it is released, it is COMPLETE in all aspects, IMO, including the disclaimer. Otherwise you are an IDIOT, IMO, to approve it.

    The best I could say about GALE in this regard, if they didn't review the finished piece, including the disclaimer, is they are totally incompetent. I don't believe that to be the case.

    OH wait, they did hire the DTG, didn't they. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Maybe these guys just aren't ready for prime time.

    Then the stock sales. The science still looks good, but after this, it does make me wonder.
    Mar 22 07:56 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,367 Comments
2,995 Likes