RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Weekly Report Card Sutro Biopharma might be a useful example.
Apr 2020 -They put out their very first dose escalation data. Although patients had reached 24 weeks the response were OK (indicative of PoC but weak on gaging efficacy)and didnt excite the market. Had no SP response. Hovering around $10.
https://www.sutrobio.com/sutro-biopharma-announces-encouraging-interim-phase-1-clinical-data-for-a-dose-escalation-study-of-stro-002-antibody-drug-conjugate-in-ovarian-cancer/
Nov 2020 - Data more mature. Sense of ORR and durability. Along with good safety profile. Stock responded strong. Going over $20.
https://www.sutrobio.com/stro-002-shows-early-efficacy-safety-in-heavily-pretreated-epithelial-ovarian-cancer-onclive-september-2020/
Dec 2020 - They did a financing at $21 per share.
https://www.sutrobio.com/sutro-biopharma-announces-closing-of-upsized-144-9-million-public-offering-including-full-exercise-of-the-underwriters-option-to-purchase-additional-shares/
I'm too dim to work out how the matket cap changed through this process (anybody have an idea?).
This would fit with Wino's suggestion that it might take some time for the data to mature to get a SP response but not quite as bad as waiting for Ph2 data. But it all depends on just when people get a sense of the potential in the drug. Too me the standout in sutro's data is the nice safety profile and durability, ORR is sufficient too.
Wino115 wrote: JFM, at what average price do you analyze that an ATM offering to pay for NASH is a fair price? I have no agenda behind asking, just wondering.  One reason is that we've all sort of assumed that barring some kind of spectacular efficacy, the initial price reaction to 1a data, whatever it is, has a high probability of being muted and still not enough to convince the thundering herds to jump in at any price.  1b data, if solid on efficacy, should do a bit more and certainly any solid P2 data really moves the needle.  I think we've assumed that 1a data is good for release as they've said (before year end), but 1b is likely midyear to fall.<br /> <br /> In a way, if they do see the data is moving the right way in cancer, they would owe it to shareholders to  see the stock run in order to pay for NASH.  In fact, if they actually do see the data move the right way they really should can the ATM, let it move up, build exceitement and then do a normal underwriting at an even higher price.  If the cancel the ATM, Cantor can write their research up too.  Just idle thoughts and I really don't have it yet worked out what I think would be a fair ATM price to pay for NASH.<br />  </p> <blockquote class="BBQuote"> <div> <cite>SPCEO1 wrote:</cite> I hope it plays out just as you have laid it out here: <br /> <br /> <blockquote class="BBQuote"> <div> <cite>jfm1330 wrote:</cite> It is clear to me that the option of going for it alone is still the most likely option for the company, so to hold a KOL presentation on NASH makes sense. Also, even if they really want to partner, it is a good thing to keep the "alone" option clearly on the table. They will not give the NASH program for almost nothing. Also, as I said before, all this partnering thing is real, but at the same time it's a tactical way to gain time, waiting for the oncology results to come in. Add to that the ATM and you see that Levesque is giving himself as much tools as he can with all possibilities open. That being said, I still think that plan A is great results in oncology, sharp rise in the SP, raising money through the ATM, and going for it alone in NASH and assess the situation after 400 patients. That being said, I think they already know how things are shaping up in oncology. If it works, they should already see signs of efficacy.</div> </blockquote> <br />  </div> </blockquote> <br /> <br />
&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;</p>