Seeking Alpha

Keelan

Keelan
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Keelan's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • InVivo Therapeutics: Time To Double Down [View article]
    Sorry, I glanced it with ctrl+F "Jesi" and "progress" and didn't see anything, let me read it again...

    Ah, I see what you're referring to, "Last Thursday (see correction, below), she had a three-month checkup, and while she says her doctors told her there was no significant medical change in her paralysis, she says she has started to feel a tingling in her toes and is able to slightly move her hips."

    Boy is my face red... still, the analogy holds- we're both definitely looking forward to additional updates / patients to get a clearer view of efficacy. It's interesting that the doctor concluded that no medical change had occurred because it appears that she's activating her hip flexors in the videos she had posted. I thought her injury was more significant than Jordan's?
    Apr 20, 2015. 10:19 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InVivo Therapeutics: Time To Double Down [View article]
    It's hard to say that a 20% pullback indicates (or shows/points out, as is the definition of the word) that no progress has occurred. That's just about in line with reasoning that an especially hot day in the winter proves global warming while an especially cool day in the summer disproves it.

    To me, there are a 2 groups of people selling here: 1) The investors who have owned the stock for a short period and have seen a significant short-term return on their investment, and are locking in gains and 2) People who have an incentive to see the pps drop.
    Apr 20, 2015. 10:02 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InVivo Therapeutics: Time To Double Down [View article]
    For whatever it's worth, every rat and monkey subject also "succeeded" in recovery. I view them as 'weak priors' for which to factor against the 'random coincidence' null hypothesis.
    Apr 13, 2015. 10:21 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InVivo Therapeutics Receives FDA Approval to Broaden Inclusion Criteria and Add 14 Additional Sites (20 Total) for Ongoing Pilot Trial [View article]
    This is sneakily enormously good news for NVIV.
    Oct 29, 2014. 10:35 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Weighing The Pros And Cons Of InVivo Therapeutics [View article]
    Jason,

    Hey I know you're busy, but I was wondering where you discovered the IP issues that Invivo had? I've been trying to find them myself but as of yet haven't had any luck.

    Also do you have a timeline for when you expect to publish your follow-up article? I don't mean any offense when I say that this article served as more of a "soft-update". The factual information, regardless of how it's being presented here, doesn't seem to have grown anymore from your October article. Aside, that is, from the information included from the March 18th publication made by Invivo themselves.

    Again, I understand your need to get out in front of the new information as quickly as possible to maintain your integrity and credibility as an analyst covering this company and by no means am I insinuating that you jumped the gun here with an early publication (in fact, if I had to speculate, I think that the nature of this article... or at least it's effect on the PPS... gave management a ton of incentive to speak with you ASAP) but I am very curious to research the IP issues for myself.
    Apr 3, 2014. 04:19 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple: Steve Jobs Was Right [View article]
    "... but the more important point is that sometimes myopically chasing only things that are obviously profitable today leads to tunnel vision. This, in turn, could doom the company's long-term prospects if the underlying markets change."

    Reminds me of something right out of "The Innovator's Dilemma". Very well written piece.
    Mar 3, 2014. 08:58 AM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why An Uplisting Could Lead To A Surge In Demand For InVivo [View article]
    Very well written article. Maybe someone else can confirm but I was under the impression Zack's current PT is 6$.
    Apr 17, 2013. 04:15 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Smith & Nephew Found Its Next Target? [View article]
    Thanks for clearing that up.
    Apr 4, 2013. 06:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Smith & Nephew Found Its Next Target? [View article]
    I'm glad you've done more research RE: NVIV.

    Perhaps my estimate is a fantasy, I'm admittedly a long and perhaps that makes me marginally more biased. The IDE was submitted Feb 28th, and without a response in 30 days the IDE is auto-approved. Pending that approval (which, again-- I'm working under the assumption, biased or not, that it will be approved fairly soon), human trials begin. In primate studies efficacy became evident as early as 2 days and as late as 3 months ( ~7:30 of this video for the 'only scaffold' section: http://bit.ly/Ze1ytn). Of course, I apologize that I mistated the efficacy duration of 3 months-- my own DD yielded different information on a different video that I can't find now.

    Here are the facts that I'm considering in my reasoning; the FDA stated in their April meeting that the studies will be broken up into two 5-patient clinical trials, and primates showed efficacy between 2 days and 3 months. This data to me doesn't provide enough to make a true FORECAST of the timeline as primate studies are not symmetrical to human studies , but I'm PREDICTING 2-3 quarters (6-9 months), with additional time being needed for the FDA to process the information. You'd be correct in calling me optimistic, and as a long-investor, I certainly couldn't fault you if you called me biased... however only time will tell if my predictions are fantasy or reality.
    Apr 4, 2013. 02:38 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Smith & Nephew Found Its Next Target? [View article]
    I mean if we're getting into the weeds of the species transition, technically there is a much larger gap between rats and monkeys (the study conducted prior to primates) than monkeys and humans. The author wrote 5+ years, but he also wrote that it was a drug and not a device-- I suppose both of these are true statements?

    I've read your posts a few times on the Yahoo board. I know your position and I know you don't like to support your assertions with data. I'm not saying there haven't been "negatives" worth considering with Invivo therapeutics-- if you want to make a case for Invivo being a risky buy the most informed way to do so would be to assert that their burn-rate won't sustain them long enough to see market. However, applying a moving-average of their burn rate to their current cash position puts them between 2 years and 18 months before they run dry (assuming no additional loans) so I'm still pretty confident.

    P.S. Try spelling running correctly, linking and quoting FDA regulations, and not tossing around ad hominem's... one tends to look more intelligent when they show restraint and poise.
    Apr 4, 2013. 01:12 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Smith & Nephew Found Its Next Target? [View article]
    D. Mero,

    "Early stage companies such as Invivo (NVIV.OB) and Verastem (VSTM) have market caps 8x and 10x greater than SNWV, respectively. To put into perspective, these budding companies are multiple years (5+) away from hitting market with their products, yet are valued at market caps 10 fold Sanuwave, a company with a potential product less than two years from market. Not to mention the countless risks involved in getting a drug to market from early phase I stages. Clearly, there remains a discounted imbalance with Sanuwave's valuation."

    I can't speak to Verastem as I don't follow it, but you're completely wrong about Invivo Therapeutics. First of all, it's not a drug-- it's a device. Second, It just received the Humanitarian Device Exemption and has a pending Investigatory Device Exemption that should receive approval within the next 2 weeks as the approval either comes automatically after 30 days (though the wording is unclear whether these are business days or calendar). The efficacy measurements are incredibly reduced relative to a non-HDE'd device, and the pre-market approval timetable is a much more rapidly moving process. This is a device that potentially demonstrates it's efficacy within 2 months (per primate studies), and thus market approval could come within the next 2 or 3 quarters.

    I'm sure the rest of your article holds merit, but confusing a medical device with a drug doesn't really help out your credibility.
    Apr 4, 2013. 11:12 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InVivo's Solution To Spinal Cord Injury Is A Billion Dollar Opportunity [View article]
    So in your mind an MBA misunderstanding the timetable for a Medical Device application is more relevant to a companies value than video's and heaps of quantitative data demonstrating the success of its product? That's an interesting perspective.
    Mar 14, 2013. 03:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Dendreon Bear Raid Of 2009: Chasing The Perpetrators [View article]
    In my limited experience, uncontrolled expectations / unrealistic timelines seems like the norm in the industry of small cap bio pharm rather than the exception.
    Mar 4, 2013. 09:22 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Dendreon Bear Raid Of 2009: Chasing The Perpetrators [View article]
    Very interesting read. I invested in DNDN Last year prior to its earnings beat that took it from ~7$ to ~13$ without ever knowing the story of Dendreon prior to its price collapse. I did about as much research as your average 22 year old investor and just assumed that this was a case of market catastrophe in the form of the reimbursable issue.

    Welp, looks like I still have a ways to go with my DD research skills.
    Mar 4, 2013. 09:02 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InVivo Therapeutics: Why Run-Up To March 9 Likely [View article]
    My mistake, I went back to the FDA site (Here: http://1.usa.gov/15l2PNV )

    In the link above is the following, "An IDE application is considered approved 30 days after it has been received by FDA, unless FDA otherwise informs the sponsor prior to 30 calendar days from the date of receipt, that the IDE is approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved."

    My takeaway is that the IDE appears to run concurrent to the HUD submittal, and both are required before human studies can take place.

    -Keelan
    Feb 28, 2013. 10:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
38 Comments
38 Likes