Skip to main content

The Dumbest Things Ever Said about AUPH

This is a competition about stupidity.  

I want to record all the incredibly dumb things said about AUPH, and then vote on a winner.  Only rule here is that you have to be quoting something someone else said. (Or if you've written something really dumb yourself, well, have at it!)

Let me kick this off with an entry from the infamous Biotech Researcher of iHub lshame. This is what he posted today on iHub.

 "We are now in a no-man's land, with the next support at about $3.90."
BR, on iHub, 5/26/2017.

Comments

  1. vidpok45May 30, 2017 at 8:07 AM

    Today BR posted " the sp has been straight down for weeks and this is disturbing". A bit disingenuous as he is thrilled to remind the longs that their investment is down. What a schmuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trading CyclistMay 30, 2017 at 8:54 AM

      Ok, excellent, that is a good addition to this page. I'm just amazed that many intelligent posters continue to engage him in spite of how obvious his game is. The walk right into his trap. Much safer and more interesting to be here, in a BR No-fly zone (!).

      Delete
  2. vidpok45June 1, 2017 at 12:19 PM

    Today BR posted "all my other biotechs are up big today but not doggy AUPH". Someone else replied, "with all your (constant) concerns about AUPH why are you still in it?" Why indeed. I recall BS, I mean BR, posting the same thought constantly back in the Ariad days when Ariad was down while the sector was up. We will more than likely have the same final result here only even better. Very interesting how BS followed us to AUPH...I wonder why.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trading CyclistJune 1, 2017 at 1:08 PM

      I feel so much saner having left that iHub house of mirrors, with the clown BR jumping out at every turn. The moderators, and in fairness the posters (!), just handed that site to him on a platter. I hope we can get the remaining sane ones will join us here. BR will not pollute out little site, that I can assure you.

      Delete
    2. vidpok45June 1, 2017 at 1:43 PM

      follow up on my previous post. Regarding the fellow whose post inquired of BS/BR as to why he still owns AUPH if he has so many concerns about it....had his post deleted! That says it all about the fascist Ihub board and the nazi administrators who run it.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

June 6, 2017. Buy Out at 63?

Take a spin on our BO pricing model! The Trading Cyclist Our model is generating a range of $35-63 BO PPS , per the low/high case scenarios below - where only the Voc  price  is different (25 k vs 50k). My hunch is that this is both conservative and in the ballpark.  It's conservative b/c: 1) patient population is consistent with Aurinia's projection; 2) assumes only 35% of population on treatment; 3) assumes 75% discount for European market; 4) pricing is at 50% of range projected by Aurinia; 5) uses target P/S ratio of 3, which is below Biotech industry average of 5.0.  Outcome   Patient Pool  (Same for both Scenarios)  Pricing :  Price/Sales ratio   Here's the  Link to the model Low end BO PPS w/30% discount:  $35  ($50 no discount)  High End BO PPS w/30% discount  $63  ($90 no discount)  Prev: 26.5 per 100,000 (Based on epidemiological study)  Total Patient po...
25 comments
Read more

June 8, 2017: The case for early approval of Voclosporin

Voclosporin will likely be approved well before the P3 trial runs it course. Here's how it's going to work.  First, there's a legal and regulatory path for this approval .  While I quote the relevant passage below, here's the link to the  FDA Regulations , as well as  a   list of drugs   t hat received accelerated approval.  Sec. 314.510 Approval based on a surrogate endpoint or on an effect on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity. FDA may grant marketing approval for a new drug product on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the drug product has an effect on a surrogate endpoin t that is reasonably likely, based on epidemiologic, therapeutic, pathophysiologic, or other evidence, to predict clinical benefit or on the basis of an effect on a clinical endpoint other than survival or irreversible morbidity. Approval under this section will be subject to the requirement that ...
16 comments
Read more

iHub has been hijacked by trolls

Yup. iHub can't get rid of "Biotech Researcher," aka BR.  It's both a win for BR (the troll), and a huge loss for iHub. Their platform loses value and credibility when they refuse to take action on perma-trolls that derail the discussion and distract investors from their efforts to just honestly share information and opinions on the equities they own. So shame on iHub for not taking action to resolve this. I'm going to cease and desist on posting there until the troll (BR) problem has been resolved, and credible, valuable posters have been reinstated. I've already cancelled my premium membership some time ago. I suggest you do the same. With kind regards to all Trading Cyclist (aka TC)
53 comments
Read more