ml1981,some thoughts about your thoughts.
Bioasis, with its xB3 platform technology, is involved as it should be with a very broad range of drugs and diseases. The most common element among all these drug/disease programs is the delivery method, xB3. Unfortunately, the means by which Bioasis continues to be judged, and valued, is by the company's success with the drug/disease combinations and not by the capability of xB3. It's unfortunate because the company should be judged and valued in some substantial way by the capability of xB3, combined with the wisdom Bioasis has employed in its choices of disease targets and payloads.
It seems to me that the market has taken the capabilities of xB3 for granted, and xB3 remains, therefore, essentially without value. I believe the company is being valued strictly in a manner similar to any other early-stage biotech that hasn't gained IND status for anything, and who has not proved anything about its drug/disease programs. And yet Bioasis is choosing payloads that are known and proven treatments for their design targets, Herceptin for HER2+ brain tumours, for instance. There is no value being given to Bioasis for the far higher than average likelihood of success of the xB3 programs.
I have always believed that it is up to the Bioasis to advance itself and its value (market cap) by accomplishing the things that establish the efficacy and value of the products, xB3-001, 004, etc. Partnership deals may provide money, but they really don't illustrate anything more than that the partners are willing to test what Bioasis believes but hasn't proven yet. And, of course, the partners haven't proven anything yet, either.
I posted in 2012 that Bioasis needed to find what I called "the hook" on p97, a peptide structure, and to use that hook to build the Bioasis drugs. I felt that I understood the protein design, manufacturing and commercial advantages of such a structure. Bioasis was started in 2008 but no such structure was ever discussed as being desirable, or essential, to Bioasis's success. The peptide was finally announced 6 years after start up, in 2014, when its development and use by MedImmune was finally announced. Before that, in 2012, I was told that for IP protection reasons, the company didn't appreciate me discussing "the hook" so I stopped musing about it. (Later in 2014, because of my knowledge and influence, Bioasis brought me on board as an adviser/copywriter contractor.)
I have fretted and fumed for 10 years about the need to advance this story through advancement to the clinic. With the peptide in 2014, I continued to post articles about advancing Transcend towards the clinic, that Bioasis could not develop its value unless we retained control of our own story instead of selling our story to the ultimate control of partners who then can and will dictate the story. (He who pays the fiddler...)
The company's position on clinical programs was why should Bioasis take those risks when partners would be willing to take it. That attitude caused a complete and, finally, visible failure that had its roots in the very founding of the company.
Now, Bioasis must enter partnerships to advance something, anything, because the company cannot advance its programs, not even to IND submission, due to poor share structure and finances. But at least the company is advancing, and on a really broad scale compared to the past.
So, mj1981, because the company is involved in so many drug/disease programs and partnerships, and because the company is not publishing very much information about how deals are worked out or how they're structured, and because they have too many drug/disease combinations to describe in detail, and because disclosure is considerably controlled by partners and licensees, how are potential investors and current shareholders going to discern meaning, opportunities and prospects from the scant knowledge we have? How do we discover what can be known, what is true, what is possible, what is not true, and what is not possible? What might deals look like? What might drugs like xB3-004 (IL-1Ra) be used for? What are their targets? What are the values of successes with these targets?
I get the impression that you have lowered yourself, against your better judgement, to come on here and judge Stockhouse, its posters and its readers from some high perch of your own. I agree, beenthere is worthless as a poster. So is Aarcor and some others like him. prophetoffacts is a stopped watch, correct twice a day but otherwise running his own twilight time zone.
As far as I am concerned, there is no other place for information or for shareholders to meet than here. Bioasis IR often can't answer important questions. Most people don't like to call a CEO. CEOs almost always offer the same shtick. It's tough for shareholders to remain knowledgeable and confident about Bioasis.
Somebody needs to try and explain at least some stuff, mj1981. You have been nowhere in sight these many years, despite your self-described knowledge. Unfortunately, it's now a far tougher job to explain Bioasis than in the past. Besides the bewildering secrecy we have to live with, there are far too many drug/disease combinations for lay people to understand in even rudimentary terms. I haven't had any help, none, from Bioasis for over two years and it's all gotten too big for me to pursue without immense effort, waking up at 4am and reading scientific paper after paper to try to back up my posts with sound knowledge.
This forum is often disappointing, and I have grown to very much dislike getting involved in the onerous efforts of those who cannot make an informed argument for or against Bioasis. They call me and others names, accuse us of things that are false, state that Bioasis will not accomplish anything for another 10 years, etc, etc. I challenge these people, anonymous people, only to make sure that these fools do not represent the only voices heard here.
Integrity, good information and considered opinion must be able to exist not only on its own merits, but also as a force against hate, fear, anger, foolishness, meanness, ageism, incessant negativism, and the malice of trolls.
The end is hard to see, but I think it's very possible, maybe even probable, that I and others have been right about Bioasis all along, that with the required accomplishments Bioasis should bring exceptional value to shareholders.
You are right, mj1981, there is no guarantee, but if there was a guarantee, there would be nothing to speculate about and no investment to be made. Thank heavens for no guarantees.
What I'm saying is, go easy, mj1981, we're all trying to muddle our ways through this. It's not easy.
And I'm an old man, arguing against other old men, I hear. It's true, I guess. Jane and I are celebrating our 50th wedding anniversary on Saturday. Am I to believe that old people, like we, have no place discussing anything but yesterday's weather?
Ok, that's enough for this old guy. I'm beat. Time for my walk along the Mighty Fraser, with Jon Batiste's latest album, "We Are," in the buds, played too loud, which I suspect is how he would like it played. Batiste has 11 Grammy nominations this year, 8 from this album! It's a great high-pace walking album, great enough for me to get around its occasionally religious references and themes.
I recently came across another old person on the River Trail. We had a great chat.
Nice day, yesterday.
Yup.
Today is too.
What?
jd