ImmunityBio ($IBRX) Deep Dive: ANKTIVA, News, Charts

Hosted by @Josh Levitan · 2026-02-09 · Tags: IBRX

TLDR

Participants expressed strong long-term confidence in ImmunityBio and ANKTIVA, citing Saudi approval, the broader NK-cell platform, leadership, rising volume, and potential international expansion. They debated dilution, institutional ownership, late-day block trades, and whether reported short interest could produce a squeeze, with Speaker 4 arguing that much of it reflects hedged market-making activity rather than bearish speculation.

Speakers

Notable quotes

Transcript

Josh Levitan: What's up, guys? We're going to get some people in here first before we get going. Just wait out for a few minutes, but hope everybody's doing good here. It's Thursday night, right? So let me know if you got me here. Let me know if you hear me. Toss me like a thumbs up or something if you hear this music here. If you hear me right now, let me know. Good? Perfect. Wait out a few minutes here, just about 5 minutes, not too long. Hopefully we're going to get some people in here that are a lot smarter than me. Because I don't know the first thing about... Antiva, let alone any sort of pharmaceutical. So I want to get some people in here that know their stuff. I'll tell you a bit about myself, of course, just once we begin, but I'm a trader, investor, not a pharmacist, not a chemist, not in the medical field. So hopefully get a lot of people here to build up a good community. We'll get going to 705. There we go. Get some more people in here right now. Like we said, we'll get going 7 to 5 here, folks. Just a few minutes. Get some people in here to begin. Get some speakers in here and as well. Anyone verified, I'll toss you just pretty much mic at first. You got Juan here. You got R. Dennis joining us also. Perfect. Look at those palm trees dance. Sound good. There we go. Sean joining us right here. Perfect. Perfect. I was hoping I wasn't even talking to a ghost this evening. So good to see a few of us already in right now. I'll tell you what, man, we got a lot of people that are in the IVRX community and I had no idea walking in. So Get my voice cling and Spotify radio right now. Nothing like some Dutch house music. Tell you what, it's my first time doing this. Kill the music in second here, but... I don't know if I can show any charts, do some screen share, any of that good stuff. If we can, we can, but if not, all good.

Speaker 2: Two minutes we'll get going here, folks. Two minutes.

Josh Levitan: Get some more heads popping in here. Perfect. Perfect. All right, I'm an impatient person here, so let's get going, let's get going, let's get going. How about that for a fade out, right? Well, DJ right there. All right, guys, and gals, anyone here talking here right now, right? Let's get a few people. How do we get here? How do we get here? Let's get our dentist on if you want. If you want to jump on our dentist, let me know. Anyone else that wants to jump on as a speaker? Hey, hand on up, let me know. I got you. But, you know, more or less, I'll tell you what. My name's Josh. I have been trading for about 11, 12 years, part of a company, Cyber Trading University. Feel free to check us out. That's not the purpose of the spaces, though. It is to tell you, though, I started posting about IBRX maybe like a month ago, and it was pretty much simultaneous with the Activa Saudi FDA approval news. We day trade in my company, so we jump in and out a lot of trades throughout the week. A lot of times I barely remember what I have to eat for breakfast in the morning, right? So we focus on small cap stocks. We do the large caps too. But it was perfect timing where Anktiva got the Saudi FDA fast track approval, right? So immediately we start trading it. I saw the news, okay, that's pretty important. Maybe this could be some sort of swing trade for us here. Then there's a lot of things that popped off in terms of what I teach with, order flow and volume and like a 7 million share transaction that set off that afternoon. So I got in at like 3 bucks. Now, it was perfect timing. It's not always the case with trading and investing, whatever. So I flipped this into a swing trade a long term now, basically, I'm going to ride this out. And when I started posting about it, man, I, you know, X is like an echo chamber, right? And you start posting some stuff here and there, you're talking to yourself. I got more response and feedback on IBRX. It's insane. I had no idea what I was walking into. I was calling it a small-cap stock. It is not small-cap. It is a mid-cap stock. Got to give it some respect. But man, it's great to see everybody here tonight. I want to learn more about this company right now. That's the objective for me. I always like to tell my students when I trade with them, you don't need to be the smartest person in the room to trade. I'm certainly not the sharpest tool in this shed, the brightest, boldest bunch. And I say that in my trading room. I'm definitely saying that here. So if anyone has any information regarding IBRX, Activa, give us some good intel. Let us know here, folks, right? That is the purpose of this spaces. So if you got any juicy info, if you're a trader, investor as well, if you want to talk shop there too, let me know. Check out their earnings coming up here, at least when they're going to have them. But If anyone's got some good gossip, any good info, if you are in the trade right now, let me know here. Throw your hand up right now if you want to speak. I think it gives the option right now if you want to talk right now. So a few of us here just jumping on right now, perhaps. I'm going to start posting this out right now. Get some more people in here too. If there's anyone else that has some good info, let me know here. I got a request here from Ed. There you go. I don't know how to work this stuff, Ed. So there we go. We got Ed joining us right now. Ed, what's going on? Edward.

Speaker 2: Hello, can you hear me?

Josh Levitan: Oh, yeah, I got you here, man. How's it going? Thanks for coming on.

Speaker 3: Good, man. How are you doing tonight?

Josh Levitan: I'm doing good. I'm doing good. So tell me, you know, a bit about your involvement with, you know, IBRX. I mean, I appreciate you.

Speaker 3: Appreciate you running the space. I found IBRX in 2019 as under the ticker NK. And I've always had it on my watch list. I, I believed in the science then, and I've watched it develop, I mean, in incredible ways. The depth at which Patrick Soon Shang, the depth at which the approach he's looking to bring IBRX to market with is, it's fascinating and it's, it's really heavy. If you, if you, you really dive into the, the science and technology that, that he's offering because it's not just Activa, um, the entire NK cell, of course, yeah, MSync, uh, and, um, CAR T replication, cell replication and, uh, storage and, uh, delivery, you know, uh, we're really just touching the surface, but I, I made some money on it early in 21, uh, 2020, 2021. with the rise on the Operation Warp Speed candidate. And then everything just went silent. And I knew, you know, it has for years felt like something was amiss and it was out of my portfolio for a long time as it declined significantly. And I started picking it up about early 2024 again. And, you know, having watched it for five years at this point, I understood how harshly it is, uh, kneecapped during its moments of, of, um, uptick. And so I just have traded, uh, through options primarily. Um, and then, you know, I, I was in a good position in October of 2024 when we went to that 750 ish peak. Um, and then I, I, was around January 2025 and April 2025, and I watched that seven-hour, six-hour investor conference. And I mean, I recommend anybody that is interested in the science of IBRX to go back to April 2025 on their IR page and go watch the presentation in full. I mean, it is all of six hours, maybe a little more, but it's really fascinating and it's mind-boggling. And, you know, at that point in time, this last year, you know, I've been telling people that are very close to me, former clients, family and friends, you know, hey, back the truck up at two bucks, back the truck up to mixed reviews. Not everybody's going to listen and I'm not going to be pushy, but in January, I was, I was sitting on 20,000 shares and 1,500 or so options, 15 and some change. And it was, it's been great. I've repositioned now. I'm holding, I'm holding shares still, and I'm just working March and April options at this point in time. But, you know, this is, there's an opportunity here. We've watched, Josh, we've watched several companies in the last six years or so through Uh, I, I'd say like our neo brokers, right? Um, Webull, Robinhood, since the era of, of them, you know, and COVID and retail trading, I think a lot of market structure, market structure hasn't changed, but how market participants, institutions, market makers and hedge funds are operating within the market has changed significantly. And we've, we've had several of these events, you know, ASTS. I mean, Nvidia, you know, meteoric rises and these are like value creation events and they're significant and they last for years sometimes. You know, Tesla is an early example, but I think the market players, you know, big players have like have learned how and how to leverage retail towards an effective and eventual goal. I mean, Ken Griffith tells you, Ken Griffin, Citadel Securities will say that, you know, it's the market makers that set the price of anything. And so I would encourage anybody, you know, if you don't have a lot of experience just to stay with shares. But if you are confident in options, understand we are going to have just if this goes as planned, uh, as, you know, as hoped, uh, we're going to have many rises and kneecaps along the way. So hold your shares and play your options, like take your, take your calls up when we get into these pressure pressure levels where, you know, they're starting to get significant resistance by puts, uh, take that back down a little bit and reload, let it settle, let it find support and go back into calls. I think, you know, if you look, I was reviewing today, the 675 to 750 mark, you can take that back to 2016 as a support and resistance. But over the years, over the decade, it's primarily been a significant resistance. And I think, If we break through this this week or next or next month, it's going to, you know, continue to the 16 to $18 area rapidly. And it may bounce around there and on is to continue.

Josh Levitan: Well, I'll tell you what, there's a couple things I want to touch on with exactly what you just said is pretty, you know, a few different talking points at once. So I appreciate you just coming on and, you know, no, no, no, it's a good thing. I appreciate you coming on and just giving us some good intel there, especially with especially with sticking with shares. For anyone that's not as experienced on the option side of things, if you are, great. I'm not talking to you. If you're not as experienced on the option side, it's the underlying move of the common, the equity that affects the premium. So, you know, people go to it because it's cheaper. People go to it because you could leverage it if you get to the right place at the right time. But a couple of things where like, hey, there's a few different high sectors that took off lately and they have great long-term value. So, definitely focus on good chart levels. You do need to still know your levels, support resistance, focus on trend order flow, you know, but you don't need to be the greatest investor trader to get the job done, but you don't want to jump in after it's run up 500%. Like, for example, the nuclear trades, like SMR, that went from 10 up to 55 in the last few months, the last year. But that fell off twice as fast as it ran. So if you get there wrong place, wrong time, even if it's right time, a year and a half from now, that's tough to sit out and to ride out. So I've been through that. And on the same side of it, I did not hold on to shares when I had great conviction and it cost me generational money. Like AMD back in 2016, I did enough due diligence. I actually did like the proper DD on it. You know, Lisa Sue just stepped in as CEO roughly around like that point maybe beforehand. She sounded sharp and that's a separate thing I'll get to with Patrick, PSS, more or less. I was so green with trading at the time and investing, both. I was a brand new market participant. And I got out way too soon. It ran up to exactly the price I thought it would, much more. But if you had good conviction in the company, what they do, you do your DD in terms of fundamentals, the product, then definitely ride out those shares. Fully agree. Getting to Lisa Su, it's just funny because when I first started to listen to Dr. Patrick, and my apologies for not giving him this full pronunciation on name, just getting used to it still, PSS. So more or less, you know, when I first listened to a couple of interviews from him, my first thought was just from my experience, like, wow, he's as sharp as Lisa Su. That's awesome. And actually that past conviction and experience I had with AMD, even though I mucked it up then, You know what? That helps me out for this one. So I'm going to ride this out here. I have great faith in like what they're doing. You still have to at least follow up with the product and make sure that they're on track with roadmap, roadmap with other, you know, drugs. So like you said, it's not just Antiva. I'm sure there's so much more that they're working on. One thing I saw as you were discussing, you know, going back, I'm like, yeah, they had to have had so much work done with Antiva before the Saudi news, whatever, because Any drug, if it gets to FDA approval to begin with, it takes years for it to get there. You know, all sorts of primary, secondary stuff. But I remember I saw this the last year in May when Dr. Patrick was with MBS and he was with Trump, right, and Saudi. So that alone was like a little bit of a precursor for what was to come here with the Saudi approval ultimately. It's pretty cool to kind of connect the dots there and for you to be involved with it, for much longer than that, let alone now at this point, you must be feeling incredible.

Speaker 3: Yeah, and I mean, I do feel great, Nick. I feel incredibly blessed. You know, it's for years I've been looking for, as you said, one of these generational wealth creation events for myself, you know, and to be early and before, right? Like if you took a beach and you had to consider all the grains of sand, like, you know, there's, you could say 30,000 of these grains of sand, which fit in less than a square inch, are knowledgeable at this point, but the whole beach at some point in time is going to be made aware that Angtiva, IBRX and its platforms are going to change the world. And when and when that happens, it's going to be just a watershed moment. And, you know, it's as important as you said, like your winners run. I don't know if you said that exactly, but that was a tough lesson for me to learn. I've been trading since around 2009. And, you know, I originally got into the market, but I was fascinated by watching what happened in 2008. I was a young man when I was 18 in 2008. But, you know, I think what the world effectively, what I took from the great financial recession is that Wall Street rules, you know, and the rest of us are working. You know, so if I was ever going to reach the point of true financial freedom, it would be through the use of these tools. And I mean, it's amazing how much they've developed and advanced and the access that we have to it. You know, it's almost, you're almost failing yourself if you're not looking at the market and asking questions. So, you know, I think The last point I'd like to make and as to the effect of trading for people with shares is like, forget your stop losses. You know, if you end with IBRX, if you enter, if you have a trading edge that you like to run and you're momentum trading, you're using stop losses and automatic sells. And, you know, go ahead by all means, but IBRX in itself, if you're not incredibly confident that you're going to hit each peak and trough, remove your stop losses. Because the event that we saw at the end of yesterday, you know, where they swung it down 60 cents in 14 minutes, they're just rating stop losses. And this is something that I've watched market makers do through the, through the, throughout the market on many different companies, you know. One of the most glaring examples would be like the early days of GME when it would make its meteoric rises. That first one in January up to 428, but then the following months, you know, it was almost like the market knew, you know, where it was going to go, when some of these swap events were going to happen, and they would swoop, they would like apply a ton of pressure to pull shares out of retail hands and then allow that pressure to blow off making another high. So, you know, I would just be really mindful and you're lucky to be here, I guess. And, you know, let your winner run because I think this is going to be, I mean, if you look at the full total accessible market, the TAM as they call it in pharmaceutical, You know, this may be a drug that in 20 years, every person you know is familiar with and has taken it. It may be a drug, Antiva alone may be a drug that you take several times throughout your life.

Josh Levitan: You never know on it, quite frankly. You know, let me ask you that on this, you know, with Antiva or with Ivaraxamine, what are the thoughts of them doing like any sort of offering common stock direct? I saw like a couple of formates get sent through, but like you've been in the trade for so long or you've been in the stock, not a trade to you. It's a long term. My brain will always call it a trade, but it's a long term, of course. But have you been through like an offering before? Because that's going to tank the stock price should that happen.

Speaker 3: But I've been through several. And, you know, sometimes you could, I could see him leading up, right? Or he, I, I hate to say this, but almost recognize the, the pattern of trading, um, at the ATM in the market, you know, back when volume was much lower than today, a few million a day, like I, I, in late 24 and in early 25, you know, I felt that I could see the trading desk selling those ATM. shares, just seeing the pressure, the downward pressure in a point that didn't make sense because we weren't in an uptrend, you know, or, you know, just fairly stable. But again, I, you know, IBRX is such a unique situation. It's, it's been kind of left alone. And I don't want to get into some of maybe like the conspiracies behind it, but ultimately I guess you could just say that like because Patrick soon Chong owns 80 3% of the effective shares. You know, it scares institutions because he has complete control.

Josh Levitan: Yeah, if he dumps off X amount, then that's going to like crush the trade, even if it's like 5% of what he has, right?

Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah. You know, and like beyond that, you know, Black Rock, Fidelity, State Street couldn't get together and say, we want to take this company in another direction. Let's vote with our large share base, you know, and hadn't do anything effectively because you just the only share, the only voter that matters is Patrick Suits Young, you know, and so and there may be other political reasons. But if you look at it, you know, we've we went, I think we've had three offerings and one was a private placement since October of 2024. And you know, we spiked up to 750 in October. I knew it was coming down. So I I traded around that and I went into puts and I know I don't like the short necessarily. In in a biopharmaceutical because they can be so explosive. But. Then the offering came, I think in December of 2024 or maybe it was January and it just kneecapped us from like around $5 back to $350 and then throughout the year. But if we were to see another offering today, you know, he reported that they had 250 million in operating cash and I've noticed that they he has tended to do his offerings at around the 125 mark and the majority of them are not very big, you know, 30 million shares. 50 million shares, 45 million shares. And then, you know, he has like his debt conversions as well. I don't see it making a significant impact. Like, yeah, we could lose 20% if they announced an offering tomorrow, but I don't think we're going to see $2 again.

Josh Levitan: You know, there is some stock that did an offering in the last couple of months. I forgot. I've been trying to remember like the last few seconds. I'm ****** because normally like I'll It'll come to me, but this one's tough. So they did an offering legit, like next two days later, just slingshot it up. It was like just no problem. Just buyers eat it up and just perfect. It doesn't always happen.

Speaker 3: It could also be good news. You know, I was considering this just the other day with a buddy of mine on the phone. What if it's a direct placement with the Saudis, their federal government?

Josh Levitan: Yep.

Speaker 3: Yeah. And so not, it's not really, it's not at the market offering with nobody interested, but market participants retail. This is a, this is a direct placement with one of the richest governments in the world. And, you know, it's going to come along with ties. Like one thing I don't think we've seen yet is we know we have this Saudi connection they approved. of us Antiva for two indications. And we know that there's a technology share. We know there's another meeting this month, but we have gotten no details about, you know, what they're giving us, what they're giving IBRX in order for IBRX to share this technology. And it simply could be because Patrick Sun Xiang wants its use to spread. You know, however, I just, I couldn't imagine this isn't tied $2 at the end of the day. I mean, money talks and ******** walks, right? So like, I think there's going to be another shoe to drop with this Saudi and maybe the last needed capital raise could be directly through them, you know, and then the other side of the US Saudi summit we keep hearing about is the US and we haven't heard a peep from the federal government. From any in any at any level, we do know Patrick Xun Shang has close ties with RFK Junior with Trump seemingly. He was asked in 2016 to be Trump's commissioner at the NIH, which is RFK Junior's current role. I believe and then and declined it because he said he was more valuable in the clinic. He was still creating what what he had is so confident about today. So, you know, I've I've held the theory for about a year that there's going to be a an announcement and a watershed moment and, you know, bring some of this to light. Like, I'm not sure if you're familiar or earlier last year, Patrick Soon Chong said that he was. Effectively shut down by Biden's administration, you know, through Operation Warp Speed. um and has says he claimed he had receipts and communications uh I don't know with who uh that there was a concerted the concerted effort to stifle uh IBRX's pathway through the FDA.

Josh Levitan: You know that's interesting I never heard of that and I don't mean that about it I just that that I never saw that so that's like I take your word there that's crazy and.

Speaker 3: You know what that kind of He speaks on on how IBRX had a covid vaccine that cleared COVID from the body, and it was one of eight through in Operation Warp Speed, the only of eight that cleared COVID of the body, you know, and I mean, we could get into like different conspiracies, but I think generally what it was is, is the federal government gave blank checks to Pfizer and Johnson and Johnson.

Josh Levitan: Now that you say that, I actually will, of course, like I see the spike in 2021, whatever, but like. man, my day trading brain. So like with what I do with my company and **** like there was a small cap and it started with an I ended an X. So do the math, IBRX. I'm pretty sure it was the first company that reported any sort of news regarding like a COVID anything like vaccine solution, because it was the first one that popped up for us. And we're always on top of news and **** like any stock that pops. So after it was that first one, which I think it was IBRX, then it was like, It was like INO, it was, it was CODX, all of those. So pretty crazy, man. Pretty crazy. And, you know, here's the thing. Like, eventually for me, I'm just always speaking for me, you know, please, like I'm rooting it on all the way through to the finish line and then some. But eventually my brain is going to grow a little impatient with the trade. It sucks because you can't be perfect on any trade, but you want to root any company on. So I'm probably going to get out of it at some point in time. Like I have no idea when, where. I gave levels, I posted some stuff in the spaces chat there, which I saw you did too, when I was reading it up as well, just the, you know, your link that you had sent over. So sent over some levels and we'll see what happens with it. But eventually I'll probably get out around, I don't know, just shoot from the head like mid-year. I would love to hold on at least till then. And I might jump back in at some point, right? But I'm going to be rooting this all the way through. You know what? I want to see if there's anyone else that's going to have the chance to jump on right now. You know, I see a few more people joining in right now. Ed, stay on me. I want to have you on with me here. But if there's anyone else that wants to jump on right now, let me know. I want to hear from everybody all together.

Speaker 3: That I put in the comments, it was last March, the investor day conference, and there's a link in there to watch the video. And it's a deep dive of the science. It's again, about 6 hours long, but it'll make you, it'll probably help you change your mind from selling next year to holding for the rest of your life.

Josh Levitan: All right, well, listen, stay on board. I want to have you as a speaker, too. So stick around here for a sec. We got agnostic on joining us right now. Agnostic, what's going on?

Speaker 2: Hey, guys, how are you doing?

Josh Levitan: Doing great.

Speaker 2: Good to hear. Yeah, good to hear. I got some stuff to share. A friend of mine from L.A. knows Dr. Sean real well. This guy's serious, serious. Honest as today, don't need the money. just really into the science. So like there's a lot of fear mongering and I'd love to maybe somebody who holds a debate against the best of the best short sellers and see what their, you know, thesis is, is complete garbage, right? Look, have you ever seen a pump and dumper put 800 million, 600 million of his own money into a deal to pump what? To pump himself? I mean, how stupid is that thesis, right? And then I've seen a couple of guys at, you know, naysayers that just quotes totally misinformation, right? Totally wrong. Not what this is all about. They just say whatever the hell they want to say just to carry on their ********. So let's look at this as a risk. Let's say you're a risk officer. And then you go, okay, my trader wants to short this. All right, he's got six bucks, seven bucks. Well, actually, if you look at the chart, 50 million shares were short before January. So there was like two bucks, 250, which is Bubkus. And then now, you know, and then they rose to like 75 million shares. So 25 million at four. And then now it's like 135. So another 50 million at what, six, best case, six and a half, maybe a few lucky trades at seven. There's just not enough upside for these guys to really make some sense out of this trade because it's not going broke. It doesn't need to pay interest to himself. He can convert it. He can change the terms of the deal. He already did, right, by saying, that he could have partial redemption on his convertible. That was the whole point to shut up the shorts because, okay, I need 40 million to pay interest to myself. Okay, I'll just take $40 million worth of shares. Big deal. Tomorrow night, I can just waive it and it'll be done, paid. And also, I think the landscape is very different now in terms of where the company is versus even just six months ago or 12 months ago. I think he's bankable now. with the Saudi approval. I mean, we know a lot lots of junk bonds as a wholly, totally worthless prospects are getting done, you know, 500 million, a billion a whack. And this this company is totally bankable now. So, you know, 112 million. I don't know. I love for you guys to correct me if I'm wrong. I calculated a number of doses. Looks like it's 35,000 a dose. And I saw some posts that says 140 grand for four dose is just four to six is typical. Do the math. Do the math of what it takes to gend up 500 million of revenue. And then another thing is this, he has like the gentleman, I think it was Mr. Edward or somebody that was speaking earlier. This is a multi-pronged protocol. It has many, many, many... additional uses besides, you know, boosting the NK and, and, you know, IO 15, helping to, to fight, identify the cancer cell. And, you know, there are lots of people that just get sick because they lose their immunity ability, and that's useful. And then, you know, I, I worry more about this. I worry about big pharma. I worry about them controlling the approval committee, which I think It's not too far fetched. If you look at the resume of all the relevant members of the board, I think, you know, I'm not sure Kennedy's focusing on this at all because I've never seen him say it. Has anyone seen it? I better say this. Has anyone seen him make a comment on this? Because it's right front and center to him.

Josh Levitan: His last comment was on the Theo Von podcast, and I think he was talking about doing lines of coke in the, what was it, like an airplane?

Speaker 2: Yeah. And what did he say?

Josh Levitan: I don't think he's, I don't think he's talking about that, unfortunately.

Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly.

Josh Levitan: Unfortunately, I like Bobby, man. I'm all about Maha and all that. I like Bobby generally. Yeah, he hasn't mentioned anything about that.

Speaker 2: Yeah, I need to talk to another friend of mine who was this, for the brief campaign that he had, he had a city chairman, and I actually showed up and gave him some money, and I need to talk to that guy about that, to raise his consciousness on it. You know, he's so busy battling all the diet people and all that crazy stuff. But anyway, so getting back to this thing, love this stock, got 80,000 shares worth. not going anywhere and just going to sit tight for five years and see what happens. This guy has, Dr. Sean has, he's the number one, how do you say this? He's the number one Asian-American wealthy person in the West Coast next to, you know, Jensen. People revere him, people respect him. If he needs money, If he just say, hey, I really need 500 million to get this factory going or whatever, he can do it in a phone call to one friend who will call four friends, who will call four other friends. And the next morning, the money will be in, like, where do we sign? So this is a joke. All these short sellers are complete idiots. They don't know this guy. They should go down to LA. He owns the LA paper, right, for fun. Who the hell wants to buy it? Because his friend says, hey, you know, let's balance the view. Let's at least make it reasonable. So he said, okay, I'll just buy the LA paper. And you know, he's sold two companies that at least reported with 8 billion. I don't know what his shares are probably easy enough to grok it. maybe three or four of it. And then he has his own, and then he has his own patents and own rights to all kinds of methods. What are we, what are we talking about here?

Josh Levitan: So one thing I just want to, one thing I just want to say with the short selling, so fully agree. And like, you know, much more in terms of like, you know, the true like. fundamentals behind IBRX and like who they are, what they're about, Doc Patrick. But it is to say though, generally, like a lot of the small cap or small to mid cap, I keep calling it small, small to mid caps, you know, the pharmaceuticals, there's so many hoops and hurdles that go through. So a lot of people don't have belief in the company for that. And quite frankly, I do want to say, It's been holding well. And after this pop, it's done incredible. But long term, it's like you are what your record says you are on the chart. So for people that see this like kind of pop and drop back in 21, I get the general concept behind shorting the small caps or small to mid caps. I don't do that, though. I don't touch that. Just letting you know, like that's not what I do. But like, you know, for anyone that has success with that, God bless them. It's just that they're misinformed or uninformed at the least. Like you said, stupid, like, hey, if you've ever seen Terry Tate office linebacker, yeah, they're going to get sacked quick. They're going to get ripped through a wall once this breaks like the 200 weekly. Let me post a picture of that in the chat here because you'll see like basically it's holding under it right now. But like back in 21, once it broke over, it ran for like 350%. So, you know, once that happens, I mean, it's already very heavily shorted to begin with. It does have high short interest, but they're going to get ripped apart. And hey, that's on them.

Speaker 3: At the end of day, that's on them. Retail short traders, you know, fit that description, but there's another, there's an institutional level of shorting. And it could be that interests, you know, the interests that don't want Anktiva to market are working with institutional players to put heavy down pressure on IBRX's stock over the long term to reduce their ability to raise capital without massive dilution, you know, and that they, in some way, they are effective. And what that, you know, if we were trading in a a higher valuation, you could sell less shares to raise the hundred million dollars you need. And so, you know, I think that that's another area to look at as far as the shorts go. But, you know, the institutional short trading desks, they're not at a loss completely. So, like, in a, an event where we're going to go back into the forties and they don't have margin, you know, they don't have collateral, they don't have, the capital expense covered, they can buy into calls and limit their exposure of loss and potentially even come out profitable or break even. There is significant short pressure and there has been for a long time on IBRX. But, you know, I think it's like, it's also, it's important to see that or to understand that they're not, they're not like back against the wall. This could go to 40 bucks and they're going to close shop like Melvin Capital and GameStop.

Speaker 2: Well, I think it might be even better if this takes a slow but steady upward trend, right? So like six months from now is at nine, grinds around there for a while, then maybe by year end, you know, it's at 11. Yeah. just grind them to death. Yeah.

Speaker 3: You can go back to the Tesla short wheeze, which is argued it lasted several years, and of a long, slow grind and climb.

Speaker 2: Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. You know, so many people say, you know, Elon Musk is nuts. He's ********. You know, nothing just never happened. He'll lose his ***. You know, so many, all of us have. I talked to many people.

Josh Levitan: So I'm looking right now. It says that I it says IBRX short percent of float right now is at like 41% currently.

Speaker 2: It's 100% of external float. He's not selling anything.

Josh Levitan: Oh yeah, no, of course, of course. But like, you know, it's overall like free float, I guess.

Speaker 3: If there's 135 million shares short and there's 984 million in the outstanding, then you know, you have about 14%. But if you remove Patrick Sunshong insider ownership, Now you're talking about 40%, but then, you know, beyond that, you should remove insider ownership and institutional ownership. There's about 90 million shares that aren't spoken for by Patrick Soon Shang or the biggest players like State Street, BlackRock, Vancouver, Fidelity. And so you have 135 million shares sold short and only 90 million in the free flow that aren't spoken for. You know, if you look at the institutional investment over the last 18 months, It's just steadily increasing. BlackRock is not selling their shares. They are not.

Speaker 2: No, they're not. They're not.

Speaker 3: But when push comes to shove and the shorts need to exit their position, there's a very limited pool of shares to purchase.

Speaker 2: Any one of you guys were in on... that stock, oh geez, that Ackman was in. Oh, General Grove. That's right. Were you guys in on that at two bucks, buck and a half?

Speaker 3: No, no, no, no.

Speaker 2: Oh, man. It took forever. And like Josh said, you know, I got out too early and I hate myself for that. And it just takes a long time to then suddenly it just takes off. Obviously, some event happened, you know, some refinancing of the malls took place, whatever. But that, you know, it just took longer than you think. And, you know, that's why holding the shares makes some sense. Or maybe selling leap puts, you know, as crazy as it may sound, like out of the money, like 12s and 15s and 10s, 2027. why not you can get it at a discount you can equivalent break even of like below five what the hell I'll take it and I'm not worried about it I'll you know uh if I'm in there below that then it is what it is so um anyway thank you for uh this opportunity and um good luck to all of you and uh I just love to have someone set up a debate on their big thesis of why this is a great short.

Josh Levitan: I'll tell you what, so stay on board for a quick sec. We got someone to respond back and maybe they're here right now, maybe they want to jump on, but they wrote here in the spaces comments kind of saying like, hey, speaker doesn't really know what they're talking about. The short position genesis, I'm using kinder words. It says, Fintel reports no hedge. Funds are short. The stock is closely held, so short interest will rise as volume slash buying grows. Why is that? Because market makers short sell to fill buy orders. It's perfectly legal. Then they hedge, so there's no short squeeze.

Speaker 2: Where's the hedge? Where's the hedge? There's just got to be in one more side to this trade, right? Where's the hedge?

Speaker 3: Great theory. In options, you can't count 135 million shares represented through options, even going out two years.

Speaker 2: Exactly. Yeah, look at the outstanding contracts.

Speaker 3: And there's a lot of different information and Wall Street's not honest. We've learned that several times. So like, sure, a Fintel report. So you're going to believe a Fintel report over what you're seeing with your eyes?

Speaker 2: Yeah, but I don't see 135 years of options hedged. I don't see it.

Speaker 3: Me neither.

Josh Levitan: I tell you, I, hey, when I saw FDA, like this is only my pea brain here. So as far as I keep me coming into this into the trade, when I saw Saudi FDA fast track approval, A, it's like, okay, they've gone through all the hoops and hurdles to get the approval to begin with from any government, B, let alone Saudi, like money. Yeah, I can't really see this going south in terms of like the news itself. I'm going to wait this out. And once it breaks that 200 weekly, I think that shorts are going to get killed. So, oh, and something I was going to mention quick, a couple of things. So IBRX, I think the monthly chart, it closed January monthly on I think like three times or almost five times the amount of volume compared to the prior month. And the prior month was the most amount of shares traded cumulatively in a month. So this more than quintupled it. So that's just where one of two things happen after such peak volume kicks in. It's either a reversal, it's game over. I don't think that's the case. Or this thing's going to freaking rip that much harder. You know, the other side to that story is like, look at silver SLV. You know, that closed the January monthly candle on like triple the amount of volume compared to December. And that was like the highest ever at that point because it's a short that's a short squeeze, you know, that's a parabolic move. So after that ended up finishing up January, it's there's differences. I'm just pointing out sort. No, I like that. But with SLV that the January monthly candle, there's a sharp up wick. So you know that that's a red flag plus that crazy volume. So it immediately tanks going into February and you know, it's still doing all right grand scheme of things, but Hopefully, IBRX just holds here. That's all we need to see, just consolidation and a slow move up from here, and I'll be happy.

Speaker 3: To speak on that monthly candle, I think that's a really good point. One thing to consider is that as we have raised capital over the years, there's more outstanding shares, so you should generally see more trading volume. But it looks like we were 308 million in December and 1 billion 43 million in January alone. And, you know, you could say that volume precedes price movement up or down because institutions are going to, you know, someone's in the know, right. And they're going to put themselves in a in a position to gain from it. However, I think we haven't in my belief, we haven't seen. We haven't seen much this year is going to be. quite explosive. And I think the trend is going to continue for a long time to come.

Josh Levitan: So I want to respond back to a gentleman here, I believe, or gentle lady, 2026, we're in big 2026. So whomever you may be on social right now, kind of chatting us here just on the spaces, thank you so much. I appreciate you. And I would love to have you join on here as a speaker. PC at 17. So I just want to just kind of comment back because they had said like, one last thing, the stock is up 300% in about a month. Listen, if there's no short squeeze yet, it ain't happening. I disagree. I strongly disagree. I couldn't disagree anymore. Let me tell you why. If you look back at the April monthly candle from 2020, May, May 2020 monthly candle, IVRX had popped from 4 up to 8 at that point, had closed at 6 and change. So it's a similar candle in essence to what we had back in January. You can kind of combine like April and May of 2020 together, and that's essentially the Jan 26th. Look what happened in June. Look what happened in June of 2020 there, PC. thing freaking exploded, ripped way higher up to 13. So I wouldn't say that it ain't happening yet. You know, you said if there's no short squeeze yet, it ain't happening. Look at the chart. History has a tendency to repeat itself, right? So just pointing out, hey, now the government involved, Saudi government likely to be involved over time, let alone FDA. You know, obviously difference. We've got to wait for money to come in either way. But I think that there's a lot more news out on this. But, hey, maybe, again, Ed, stay on board with me here if you want, either way, and agnostic if you want to jump back on too. We're going to go for another like 10 minutes, 15 minutes if you want, guys. I was figuring making this like an hour or so. But if anyone else wants to come on here and just speak for a little bit, let me know. Got you here. Yeah, I was hoping to get Dr. Patrick himself on here, but, you know, next time. I'll tell you what, actually, we had Agnostic on just before who had mentioned, right, if I'm not mistaken, he had a first degree, second degree, somewhat relationship with Dr. Patrick. All right, we got PC on here. Gentlemen, or gentlelady, whomever you may be on social, just chatting with us here. Hey, how you doing here? How's it going here tonight? Let us know what you're thinking. And did I get you here? I think I got you. Oh, I didn't get you? There you go. You're good now, PC. No, no, no, no, no. You jumped in, jumped out. All right, that's it. Agnostic back on. Agnostic back on.

Speaker 2: Yeah, sorry about that. Yeah, one more thing. You guys, well, you know, always do your own research, right? But I looked into this Saudi Health Authority. They're not a camel jockey ********. They are for real. And they are the most respected in the entire Middle East. They actually make the calls for all of those countries. And they're on a drive to improve the excellence so that they can be world class. No, they're not the FDA. No, but they're damn good. And so they have authority over all these other countries. And therefore, there'll be a cascading approval very, very soon. And they understand money. Absolutely do. And a billion dollars for them is a drop in the bucket. Absolute a drop in the bucket. So again, you know, all you shorties, enjoy yourself. We'll just stay steady and all that. Like today, it was fascinating. If you guys look, screen your traits, you know, on the chart on the right hand side of the chart and you can see the trades go on today. They were doing their standard end of day dump, the short people. They were just smashing at 2000, 5000, 1000, 2000. And then they got wiped. How it stopped, right at 662, some guy came in two shots. 300,000 shares, 399, I think 800,000 shares altogether, 399. It was two very interesting number, exactly the same number of shares, all within 30 seconds, 20, 15 seconds, right at the end, and just stuffed them. This guy, whoever did that, spent five and a half million today. and just knew what exactly what he was doing. He was waiting for the end of the day because he'd get better pricing because these guys were going to dump. But even they were when they were trying to dump the five minutes from, you know, five minutes before the close, they couldn't get anywhere. There were plenty of support. So it only came down like three, four cents, five cents. And then this guy showed up and that was the close. So watch that, watch that end of day drama. It's fun. Getting some help. on the long side for sure.

Josh Levitan: Yeah, I really, I really agree with you there. Definitely, well agnostic. Hey, I want to get PC on here. You just joined on right now. You got to just click the microphone there, PC, to unmute yourself. There you go. How's it going? Hey, guys. So talk to us here. How do you feel? Doing good, doing good. Peace and love. Peace and love here. So you may be a bear. You may be a short trader. So all love here. Just tell us how you think.

Speaker 4: So a couple of things. First of all, definitely not a bear. I have more shares than I think anyone in here has admitted to having. Secondly, I've been following this company for years. Third, I have experience with institutional trade desks and of the sorts. And so if you guys want to go back in time and talk about single candles and things like that, I would suggest you take a step back and look at the total diction. We accumulated 100 million shares short. And up to that point, the borrowing rate was 1% or 2%. Now, if 100 million shares go short in another company that's this closely held, It would cause a short squeeze. The reason why there's no short squeeze here is because...

Speaker 2: Oh.

Speaker 4: What did you do? I didn't do anything, I just looked at the app, that's it.

Josh Levitan: Oh, ****. Ah, we lose PC.

Speaker 2: Yeah, we lost, I lost, we lost connection.

Josh Levitan: Yeah, I may have lost him there for a second. PC, we lost you for a second. You're not, you're not muted, but I don't know what happened. This is what happens when you're on 1% and then your battery dies. Because I've been there. Is this how it looks on the other side?

Speaker 2: He was just getting to the good part.

Speaker 3: Yeah. I was going to interject. He may come back for us, but you know, if you're considering the long trader desk, you know, potentially the Saudi the sovereign wealth fund, they're not unhappy to see that end of day dump and they're not unhappy to see the short trade desk push the price back down because their ultimate goal is, you know, they have they want to collect as many shares as they can or that has been authorized for them to purchase for the best pricing. And so, you know, we see the seesaw all day long and, you know, we're going to find liquidity. where Shortz believe that buying is drying up and we're going to find liquidity again where buyers, you know, want to step in. And as Gnostic said, you know, it was one person or one firm, you know, that just sniped 600,000 shares at the end of today or 300,000 twice. Yeah.

Josh Levitan: Here's something to keep an eye on, because this is how like I just, my eyes just are glued to this trade after. So at the end of every day, you always see a big volume spike on the chart. It's just like a conglomerate of orders that get filled. So like today on IVRX, it's just the end of day transaction, but it was like for around like 400,000 or something. That's typical. That's for every stock out there, NVIDIA, Palantir, IRIN, IBRX, blah, blah, blah. Now, on January 14th, it was crazy. So like the news came out already with the Saudi and it was kind of slow that day, really. It was like kind of like pop drop. It was like a little slow a little bit and curling up. All right. And it was about 7 minutes before the market closed. I'll link this to the spaces here too, just for everyone else to kind of see. Crazy. This is an anomaly. It was a 7 million share transaction. And that's a pure transaction, like between, it could be an institution, it could be like, a hedge fund, it could be, someone in particular, but it was a legitimate print. It was crazy. So I'll link that here in the chat coming on up. But that, you know, I'm gonna, I ever since that came out, I've been trying to find that again.

Speaker 3: So, you know, there was another one, I believe, maybe late November, but I think likely in December, and it was 15 million. And that one really opened my eyes. And then so as we got towards the end of the year, I really increased, you know, we saw that low of $1.95. I increased my position significantly. And, you know, I think you'd be, it would be unwise to not see those events and those anomalies and not at least know them. You know, there's a lot of things moving behind the scenes that we're unaware of yet.

Josh Levitan: Here, I just linked it right there. So if you click the chat, it's kind of like a quote tweet I had from January 14th. Just I don't know how to share this stuff on Spaces or whatever. You can kind of see it in the chat, but it's just insane. I know it's a small priced stock, you know, like at the time, $3, so it was at $21 million. Hey, I don't have that money, but I'm sure a lot of other people could and they could drop that. Kudos to them. But you just don't see that about like 5 minutes before the market closes on a given day. That's exactly like you talked about. Someone had mentioned that just before, like, you know, seeing that shake down to take out the stops. So that's on retailers, but somebody knows something, right? Oh, we got PC back joining us right now. PC, PC getting back on just right now. There we go. There we go.

Speaker 4: Yeah, I'm here. I'm sorry. Did you guys hear what I told you? I'm not sure if it just cut out.

Speaker 3: You cut out at--.

Josh Levitan: Yeah, your phone cut out. I didn't know if you're at 1% or so.

Speaker 3: You're saying the short squeeze hasn't happened because.

Speaker 4: OK. OK, the short squeeze hasn't happened because the position is derived from people betting against the stock going down. It's the result of market makers filling orders, and they don't have the shares to fill them because they're all-- it's closely held. I feel like I just got cut off again.

Josh Levitan: No, no, no, you didn't. You're good.

Speaker 4: So to make my case, if you look at the short interest over the last couple of years, OK, we were basically at $100 million, $105 million going into January. And the borrow rate up until that point was 1% or 2% at Schwab. All right, which means there wasn't a lot of demand for the stock. If there's not a lot of demand for the stock, then the people that are short selling this aren't the ones looking for shares. Market makers, when they're performing bona fide market--.

Josh Levitan: No, no, he cut off. He actually just cut off right there, didn't he? I think he. No. Please, PC, we want you here. We want you to talk. We want you to talk. I wonder how long he was talking the first time before he found out he's cut off. Because he says he's not attested. I think that could have been like a 10 minute thing.

Speaker 4: That's too bad. Poor God.

Josh Levitan: Hold on, I got to check this thing because this is my first basis too.

Speaker 4: I got a, I got a, as a host. There you go. Your time's a charm, baby. Yeah. You're back from the dead. Sorry, I don't know why my connection's so bad here. I'm actually at home, so odd. All right, so I'm not sure where you guys, where you stopped hearing what I was saying?

Speaker 3: You said that it's the market makers doing bona fide.

Speaker 4: Oh yeah, market-making activity. And there is no affirmative determination responsibility. They don't have to locate shares before they fill the buy order with their naked short sell.

Speaker 3: They just need a reasonable belief that they can find them in the future.

Speaker 4: Well, I mean, that would pretty much be affirmative determination, right? So they don't have to abide by that when they're performing market-making activity specifically. So most of the people that are long right now, probably are the result of short selling. They wouldn't be long if it wasn't for someone short selling the shares to them to buy. And so if you look at all the numbers here, we had 100 million in short, and the borrow rate was only 1% or 2% at Schwab. So there was no demand, which to me clearly shows that it's not the hedge funds that are shorting, especially when you look at the Fintel reports, the SEC reports. There's just no one that's dumb enough to be shorting this right now. So when we saw a spike in volume, we also saw a spike in short interest because there's buyers lining up to buy the stock. And what they'll do is they'll immediately hedge. The hedge desk takes care of it. And it does not have to be an immunity borrow. So I agree with the people who say, well, how can that be? Because options alone aren't going to cover that. No, they can short anything. or buy anything they need to protect that position. It does not have to be an immunity buyer. So I don't expect a short squeeze. The numbers don't support it. The SEC reports don't show the short positions. I think this is just a result of buying. And I know that's counterintuitive to what most retail traders think, but that's what I'm seeing. And I've seen this now for the last year or two, that this short position has gradually increased, the volumes gradually increased. And the one other thing, am I still on?

Speaker 3: You are.

Speaker 2: You're good, you're good.

Speaker 4: Okay, cool, great. The other thing I would mention, I think you guys were talking about late day prints in the market. Yeah. Okay. Let me unpack that. I'm not sure if someone else unpacked that for you. So if I'm repeating myself, feel free to tell me to shut up. What's happening with the late day prints is when a fund uses a third party to fill their orders. They hire the broker to do it. The broker goes into the market, and they may accumulate those 15 million shares over the course of two weeks and thousands and thousands of trades. So they accumulate the position. When they flip it to the client, that order is going to show as 15 million shares. Everyone's going to be sitting here thinking, wow, someone just transacted 15 million shares. Yeah, kind of, yes, but It's not going to have any impact on the stock, because it's been something that's been accumulated by the broker over those days, hours, whatever it might be. And when they flip the position to the buyer, technically, that's another trade. It has to be reported. And then you see that.

Josh Levitan: Now, a couple of questions I got for you. I'm sorry. Just like respectfully, I just want to I'm interested. So were you because I was referring to two separate types of transactions. One's at literally at 4 o'clock, much like at 9.30 in the morning. It's kind of like an aggregate of, so is that it? Because there's also the 7 million I was talking about, that was 5 minutes before the end of the day.

Speaker 4: Yeah, when you see a large, large trade and you don't see any big move in the stock that continues through, it's not. a buyer. It's the broker just completing the trade through the buyer. In other words, that buyer is not really out in the market anymore. They're done. At the point that you see that trade, they're done. The broker has flipped that position to the ultimate owner of the stock. And it typically happens at the end of the day.

Speaker 3: Yet there still is a party that was interested in collecting 7 million shares or 15 million shares.

Speaker 4: Yes, absolutely true. No doubt about it. But they didn't do that in one transaction.

Speaker 3: Yeah.

Speaker 4: They accumulated.

Josh Levitan: How long do they have to, how long do they have until they could like report that though? Because like you said, they're like giving that, they're kind of finishing up for the client. So how long do they have from the time where the client actually gets the, like makes the trade to where he gets the shares? Like, you know what I mean?

Speaker 3: I think what PC is saying is that it's in the moment that the trading desk is done collecting the amount of shares that they transfer them to the-- You guys there.

Josh Levitan: -Party that was-- Yeah, but how long do they have until they transfer? Because he's saying that could be X amount of time. If they're already out of the trade or whatever, what's the difference in time between them actually closing that out versus that showing up at the end of the day?

Speaker 3: I mean, I would imagine there isn't a-- a rule on it it it's it's what I think what he was effectively saying is that it's the it's the point in time that the trading that answers the shares to the to the party that was interested in in in gathering them so it may I don't know that there would be a time limit requirement.

Speaker 4: There's no time limit requirement, but put yourself in the broker's position. They've now accumulated a position which they don't really want. They want to stay market neutral. They just want the spread. So they're going to flip that to the client as quickly as they can.

Speaker 3: One year effectively at the point of completion.

Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly. As soon as the order is filled, they'll send it over. And you know, sometimes they're paid based on the execution price versus VWAP. So that's why you'll see the price at the end of.

Speaker 3: Oh, sure.

Josh Levitan: Listen, I'll tell you what, at the end of the day, I think that we'll find out in the coming weeks. It's not going to be today, tomorrow, next week, perhaps even. I think it's going to go into March. We'll figure out in terms of price action, at least who's fully in control of this trade for the short to mid-term. Long-term is different. I feel like, you know, especially if PCs owns a bunch of shares, like he obviously has conviction long term. So I think that we're all in this together. So, we'll kind of play it out. But yeah, I mean, going to what PC was saying, like where my point was coming from with the monthly candle, the monthly volume, that is very typical of like the conclusion of a short squeeze. So that's where it could come back down a little bit at first where the shorts look to kind of regain control, right? I'm personally prepared for that. I'm not saying that will happen or whatever. I'm just prepared. I'm in it from three. So, you know, people earn from lower, people earn from higher. You just got to know at least your risk. You know, we said before, you don't want to over leverage yourself, let alone on options, you know, even just on the common. So for anyone that's just finding out about this trade right now, I'm a rookie to the stock. You know, you got people here right now that have been in it for a while before the name change. So it is just to say that do this at your own risk. for anyone that's getting involved right now, it's already gone up about, 300% plus since the Antiba Saudi news came out. I'm sure it's going to take time for this to truly develop into a real run like it made in 2020, or even if it makes a fraction of that move, that's like a sick run. So a lot of us here would be very happy if this went up to 12 or 15, let alone, you know, 10. So I think there's a lot of good things to come. Let me ask, who knows when their next earnings is?

Speaker 3: They haven't announced yet. It'll be March.

Josh Levitan: March, okay. I know that they're not cash positive just yet, but he has a lot of money. PSS has a lot of money. But there's a difference between the company and him. So just at least as far as them eventually distributing Activo over time to Saudi, to any citizens there, and if Saudi government pays for a ton of medication, I think some people are looking forward to that, if that's going to happen or not, kind of like a rumor. So, we'll see what happens in the coming months.

Speaker 3: For the Saudi news, Adcock, in an interview three or four months ago, said that he expects profitability from the single indication in the U.S. in quarter to 2027. And so, you know, that with no changes, that was our rant, you know, as expected. I think the Saudi, the Saudi involvement may not hit Q4 2025 and maybe Q1 '26, we wouldn't know that until-- We are currently in Q1 '26.

Speaker 4: I think I'll take the other side of your guys's trade. I think things are going-- I think PSS dropped a little hint at the JPM Morgan conference stating that other regulators have reached out to them based on the Saudi movement. with greater interest. I also think it sounds like papillary supplemental BLA is not going to happen. The way the way PSS is on X just trashing the FDA sounds like they've had another change heart, which is absurd.

Speaker 3: Yeah. All right. We're really fighting the FDA. And so there's, you know, and it's been going on for a long time.

Josh Levitan: Yeah. I think it's both FDA and like putting my aluminum tinfoil hat on, it's like FDA and big pharma collusion. You know, it's I think it's of course both.

Speaker 3: That'd be my tinfoil as well. This isn't like going to hurt Merck or Johnson and Johnson. It's going to bankrupt them. Some of these biopharmaceuticals make 80% of their revenue on chemotherapy.

Speaker 4: I will also add, I think the oncologists actually make the spread on chemotherapy. Now, I haven't confirmed that yet, but if that's the case, oncologists are not going to be happy about this either.

Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I mean, you know, I've seen that argument faced just with bladder with a cystectomy is a $600,000 procedure for a hospital. Yeah.

Speaker 4: Oh, and the hospital is going to get devastated. Something like 80% of their income comes from cancer treatments.

Speaker 3: So it's the entire industry. This is what he talks about. He has been talking about for the course of a year is this shift, this paradigm shift. And, you know, he it's not just convincing one party. It's the entire medical facility, everything down from education or everything up from education. You know, and we're fighting. You know, it it does seem that the FDA FDA is wholly corrupted, but Patrick soon Chang in his wisdom is sidestepping them. And and luckily, thankfully, we found a partner in Saudi and as PC was saying that there's or I believe agnostic was saying they're they are a powerhouse in their region and their powerhouse. You know, around the globe. I mean, this is this is one of the major economies. And so the exposure there may be it may not we may not get through the FDA until there is like a public outcry from the people.

Speaker 4: I think that's everything. That's exactly what it's going to take. It's going to take people riding in the streets at the FDA. And I'll throw one of them.

Speaker 3: I think it goes back. If it goes back to my go ahead.

Speaker 4: No, go ahead. You finish. I'm sorry.

Speaker 3: I was just going to say, it goes back to my analogy I made rurally very early in this call is like the grains of sand and the spread of knowledge. You know, if you're looking at a beach, like there's one square inch of the beach that is aware of IBRX and what it can bring. And eventually, the entire beach will know. You know, it's going to be a household name five years from now.

Speaker 4: I agree. I'm going to throw one idea out here. He's talking about tourism, medical tourism. He's dropped that a couple of times now in the past day or two. I don't see any reason why they can't hit 2000 patients in Saudi Arabia in the next six months. And I think PSS is the type of guy that'll say, we're going to set up an airline to drop our patients over there and bring them back and forth.

Speaker 3: Yeah. Isn't that incredible?

Speaker 4: Right? And 2000 patients, that's a billion dollars in revenue right there.

Speaker 3: Yeah, run the numbers.

Josh Levitan: In a way, it's almost like going to like Turkey to get your like hair fixed. It's like, all right, we'll go to Saudi, you know, get treated for cancer. It's like, you know, if it's like one-to-one like that, it helps a lot of different markets in terms of tourism and, you know, obviously, in our case, IBRX. Yeah, but here's the thing though, like, why wouldn't Trump or not Trump, but like, you know, US FDA will just say government altogether collectively. Why would they not just see that and be like, okay, let's make sure that we can get this stroke here too. So I think that there's going to be a lot of...

Speaker 3: Every day, Marty McCary makes a comment. It can be about dyes. There are people in the comments asking for Antiba. They know. They are all aware. And that's what's so strange to me. I did believe for a long time, and maybe it's still true, that the Trump administration will use this as political capital as we're nearing an election year in which the GOP is nervous about, especially if this is tied to information that the Biden administration, the last former administration, stifled IBRX's progress with intention. You know, I There's no way looking at all the information and having followed this stock for six, seven years, I cannot say there isn't a conspiracy against the company. They have been sandbagged and they're continuing to be because no one is unaware of what's happening.

Josh Levitan: We got Suzanne here just with the chat real brief, just in commenting to us saying that she's worked in biotech since the early 90s. The FDA and big pharma game was the same back or even back then, they slammed good medications down until the small biotech companies sold out to them.

Speaker 3: Doesn't surprise. Sometimes they just buried patents. They just hid technology and, you know, purchase something either in bankruptcy or through offering and close the lid on it.

Josh Levitan: It's a shame that government has such a big hand in kind of dictating like kind of the future for companies altogether outside of pharma, outside of biotech and any of that. Like shoot, again, for anyone new joining the space, like not to bore you to death with my backstory, but I found out about IBRX as a trader, I'm trader investor and mainly day trader. So like I wasn't expecting to stumble into this as a long-term thing, but here we are. But, you know, the thing that stands out to me is like, if you remember iRobot, you remember iRobot and they were supposed to have some deal with Amazon. And then, you know, Elizabeth Warren came in and just killed the deal. And like now iRobot, you know, months back declared bankruptcy. So it just in a general, very general sentiment, just to say like, you got to it's such a larger game, FDA, government, politicians, like there are so many different people involved. I haven't seen any sort of government trades on IBRX since like 2023. But shoot, the second that any US politician discloses some position in them, right? They're not a small cap, they're a mid cap. So you know what, they should get some love eventually by some smaller politician out there. But once that gets posted, you know, again, as a trader, like I did BBAI, Big Bear. This was like, you know, a number of months ago. U.S. politician made their first disclosure of a purchase, it was a 42% gain on the comment. It was insane just over a short period of time. And that was a trade. So that's not long term. But it is just to say any sort of like government hand that plays a part in this move, it's going to have immense effect in the stock price up or down regardless. Right.

Speaker 3: I would agree. I don't know if we're going to get through FDA this year or potentially. uh in the next you know the the the refusal to file the RTF from last May was really confusing and you can see the frustration in Patrick soon Chang um you know even as as all the way to today you know and at BC is saying that he believes it it could be negative news again from the FDA you know pushing Patrick soon Chang to get on X and and speak about this He was comparing it to Merck that got approvals for indications with a single arm trial with patients of one or two, you know, and like here we are, we've been using Anktiva for more than 10 years. It has an incredible safety profile. And, you know, it's lymphopenia is a medically recognized problem. And with IL-15, the N803 is is the only molecule known to man that proliferates the body's natural production and strength of lymphocytes. So we're sitting on a cure to lymphopenia and the medical industries, people struggle with lymphopenia and it's reported for 40 years. You know, when your lymphocyte counts are reduced or suppressed, your mortality increases, retality rates increases across the board. It's not just cancer. I mean, it's, it's across the board from natural infection, sepsis, um, cancers at all, you know? And so it's, it's, it's glaringly obvious that, uh, something's amiss with our government. Let, let me ask a question.

Josh Levitan: We're getting PC back on for a second. I just got, I, I got a real dumb question. for anyone joining here, I'm not the sharpest tool in this shed, the brightest bulb of this bunch. I say that to my clients and my students, I coach and all that. That's true. But here, probably five times more. We got a lot of people very experienced in the medical field, pharmaceutical field, et cetera. But yeah, I mean, overall, how do we feel about just like the next three to six months? I don't know if we're going to look to try and make a stronger move up at this point, but.

Speaker 3: I would love to see IBRX submit an SBLA for lymphopenia.

Speaker 4: I think the next three to six months.

Josh Levitan: Well, here's the thing, like this is what I was gonna ask. I lost train of thought for a second. I had a reset button for a quick second in the brain. But no, seriously, have you ever heard of a drug that, and I've never, I've, you know, I have no idea about this stuff, so please inform me. I'm coming from a novice point of view. But I've never heard of a drug that treated both non-small cell lung plus bladder cancer.

Speaker 3: Well, it's treating lymphopelion.

Josh Levitan: You know, two completely separate organs, not just one near each other, like two totally ends of the spectrum. So can you tell me a little bit about that? Anyone have experience at least more than me on that?

Speaker 4: At the cellular level, the disease is the same problem.

Josh Levitan: I think PC's connecting right now. I don't know where his connection's from here.

Speaker 3: So, he was starting off at the cellular level. The disease is the same problem. Cancer is the growth of mutated cells. And inside of our bodies, we have natural killer cells and T-cells. And our natural killer cell is the only cell that can recognize and kill those mutated cancerous cells of any form. And IL-15 our Antiva N803 is, again, the only known molecule that helps the body proliferate its production and also emboldens the strength of lymphocytes, which include the natural killer cell and your T cells. And so what we're not treating necessarily like the cancer indication We're treating the body, and I say we, but I mean IBRX. We're treating the body's cell counts. You know, both my parents got cancer. My dad got cancer in 2024 and passed, and my mom got cancer in early 25. And I had, have gone through with my mother, you know, and I said, Hey, can you pull some of his old CBC blood reports? And, uh, my father before he, so he had an issue with his spine, uh, he, he nerves and he lost control of one of his legs. So he was opened up and they performed a procedure on him, uh, in July of 2024. And, you know, they did CAT scans and MRIs. And then in November of 2024, he had some significant complications. So he went back to the doctor, not with that, just wasn't feeling well. And he had tumors throughout his entire body. And so that those tumors grew in six months, you know, and his his lymphocyte count was in the four hundreds. And by definition, today, your lymphopenic at 1200. Um, and then, uh, the next year when my mom got breast cancer, she's in her seventies, uh, her lymphocyte count limp was in the eight hundreds. And so Anktiva could have helped both of my parents potentially change the outcome. And, and Patrick Soon Shung, I think on the Ted Carlson interview last year said that, uh, on the, at the onset, at the onset of a cancer diagnosis, Anktiva should be prescribed independent of indication. Because again, what it's doing is it's, it's a, it's helping the body proliferate and, and strengthen NK and T cells, lymphocytes. And so it's Edward. Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 4: Go ahead. I'm sorry, finish.

Speaker 3: We're not, for the last 60, 50 years, we've said, hey, how do we approach this problem of cancer? We attack the tumor with radiotherapy or chemotherapy as a mainstay. And so the FDA has built all of its trials over 50 years to try to measure the effects of these treatments that are being developed against a specific tumor. And so I think there's too much rigidity in the FDA. And because it's been done one way for so long, they're failing to build a platform where they can measure the effect for a drug like Angtiva, which is coming to try to find solutions to the cancer problem from a totally different angle.

Speaker 4: Edward.

Speaker 3: Yeah, go ahead.

Speaker 4: First of all, my apologies to you. You've had a tough 24 months. Jesus. That's incredible. I would simply say I would add on to what you were saying or trying to describe. This lymphopenia designation isn't just for cancer, it's for immuno diseases as well. And the best way to say it is the entire The entire industry has been treating the cancer. We're no longer treating the cancer. The cancer is simply a symptom and a problem with the immune system.

Speaker 3: Yeah, that's Patrick's belief.

Speaker 4: Yeah, and it makes all the sense in the world. Just give your body what it needs to fight the cancer and it will do it. And that lymphopenia designation, if we get that lymphopenia designation here in the US, I mean, it's... It's on another level. And the interesting thing about this, it's almost like he's coming through the back door with that lymphopenia designation.

Speaker 3: Forcing it. We have, we do have a, for lymphopenia, where I'm at status.

Speaker 4: Yeah. Yep.

Speaker 3: But he's forcing it. He's not, he's not taking no. And this was, it's an event, it's unstoppable in his own words. Like, we will get here, we will get there. And you know, it's not just, then you really have to start considering the TAM. the total accessible market, addressable market. we're, we're, we're treating potentially all cancers, sepsis, all immune diseases. Yeah, I mean, it's, almost like. You know, as I said earlier, this might be a drug that we all take several times in our lives. And this is, that's just one prong of what IBRX has, you know, and that's why like this company is worth $6 billion and is not yet profitable. It's thousands of patents. And I mean, you can't deny the value of the technology. It's being denied in the regulatory field, but nonetheless, it's effective, you know, and it seems to be, it seems to be, in line with where the future of medicine is going.

Speaker 4: And you have to remember when you look at these trial results that they've accumulated over the years that Adam Fartstein keeps attacking. The, you have to remember, these people are at death's door when they are eligible to enroll in these trials.

Speaker 3: Their 4th line, their fifth line. Some of them were 6th line. They've gone through six rounds of chemotherapy and failed all of them. They're on death's door.

Speaker 4: It would be immoral to then keep those people.

Speaker 3: We lost you, Josh.

Speaker 4: Am I there?

Speaker 3: Yes, you're here.

Speaker 4: Okay. So, anyways, they, I lost my code of hand.

Speaker 3: It would be immoral.

Speaker 4: Yeah, it would be immoral because they've already failed those other things. Hence, single arm trials are required.

Speaker 3: Right. Yeah, no, I know. And Patrick Sunchang has spoken about that as well. and it's unfortunate that so many people have had to die, but the FDA has not allowed immunity bio to run trials of their own design. They're too rigid. The FDA is as much a party, is the ultimate party to what trial design can be approved, you know, and so.

Speaker 4: And they're setting companies up. They set them up, they give them, they give them trial designs. And then when the trials are completed, they're saying, no, we don't like that trial anymore.

Speaker 3: That's what that's where our RTF came from.

Speaker 4: Yep. Yeah.

Speaker 3: This has took the wind out of the sail for nine months.

Speaker 4: I think Saudi Arabia. I think Saudi.

Speaker 3: Josh, we got to work on PC's microphone for the next chat here.

Speaker 4: Did he go again?

Speaker 3: Yeah, I think he went again. He's got such great things to say. I mean, he's bringing so much value to this conversation. It's really fascinating stuff. Again, if anybody wasn't here earlier, I put in the chat last March Investor Day conference by Immunity Bio. And if you go to that page, it's going to take you to the Immunity Bio IR Investor Relations. And there's a link in there for the webcast. And it's about 6 hours long. But it will, you will fully immerse yourself in the science. And I would suggest anybody who hasn't seen it, carve the time out this week or this weekend or next and watch it. You know, if you're invested in this company and you believe in it, you should understand, you know, as best as each of our ability to know the science as well. And it was, I've always believed in immunity bios. I've had a lot of interest for a long time in their mission and their goal. But that March Investor Day conferences, it really solidified it in a heavy way and a lot of value.

Speaker 4: I agree, Edward. And you know what? The one 10-second minute, a 10-second section of that entire six hours that was incredible was the video of the cancer cell being killed. Not right there. I nearly doubled my position on that day.

Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 4: But let me go back to this whole Saudi Arabia thing for a quick minute here. They have 13,000 people that are seeking treatment now. I'm actually surprised it's not more over at CSS.

Speaker 3: Yes.

Speaker 4: I truly believe that what he'll do now is he will shift those people over to Saudi Arabia because then he can deal out income from these people. And that income will also pay for the clinical trials, additional data.

Speaker 3: And it's just, it's more knowledge on the table defined and recorded. So to deny IBRX any longer with, you know, if we're having all these successes in Saudi, It just looks criminal.

Speaker 4: Yeah.

Speaker 3: I would agree. I would not doubt that. Now, before the first Saudi US summit, we had a little bit of an Easter egg given to us by PSS the weekend or the Friday before the week of the JPM. He said in an interview, a TV interview, I believe he said the question was posed something like, you know, are you excited to, you know, get further along the deal-making process with Saudi through this summit. And he said, no, the deal-making process is done. This is going to be the execution process. And then in the next week, we found the SFDA approved the two indications. He mentioned just this week, or I can't, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the latest, tidbit was that Saudi wants to prove for all cancer. And did that come from PSS?

Speaker 4: It did.

Speaker 3: Because it did not.

Speaker 4: It did.

Speaker 3: It did. And so here we are again at the press, you know, right before the second US Saudi summit. And he's, he's given maybe potentially another Easter egg there. And if, if it's all cancer, which that's the argument he's been making for over a year, and that I just spoke on is treat lymphopenia. And so if Saudi is opening it to all cancers, it's exactly because they're looking to treat lymphopenia. Or people that are lymphopenic. You know, because across the board, having a strengthened immune system, they they say that we you'll get cancerous cells. We get cancerous cells throughout our body, our entire lives and our NK cells. identify that and remove them. And it's only an old age or in the suppression of your immune system that cancer takes hold and kills you, except it's not only an old age anymore. I mean, younger and younger folk are getting cancer. There's maybe a lot of reasons, but it's, it's nonetheless a cancer is a symptom of our immune system failing in some way and regard. And if Anktiva is one piece of the puzzle, uh, towards a better tomorrow, a more healthy tomorrow, and lasting longevity. I just, what a ride to be on.

Speaker 4: I don't know who said it, but I really like the idea of Trump doing something close to the elections.

Speaker 3: Election.

Speaker 4: I think it's terrible. I think it's terrible to do that to patients.

Speaker 3: I agree.

Speaker 4: I have this pain for this current administration when they do this national priority voucher and the first voucher they give out isn't to cancer, it's to people that stuff their faces with chips and soda.

Speaker 3: Yeah, GLP wants. You know, I was like, I was so convinced when that was announced by Marty McCary at the FDA that was going to be the regulatory framework to help Anktiva and IBRX through the FDA. You know, maybe the old guard was just, you know, snuffing us so hard and you couldn't get around it even as even the leadership. So then they created this regulatory framework, you know, and I guess it's unknown. There's a few more. The latest one that piqued my interest, I believe, was announced in December. And it was, well, I can look it up. A plausible mechanism pathway, and we may fall under one of these here in the future, but I, I just think because of who you know, the current administration, I don't think he would miss the Trump. I don't think Trump would allow. I don't think that administration would allow themselves to miss the opportunity to be the administration that brings potentially a cure to cancer to market and not let everyone know that they did it, you know. And there's massive political capital in doing so, especially if it's coupled with evidence that it was snuffed under the last administration.

Speaker 4: Well, did you see those emails between Fauci and Collins?

Speaker 3: I think I did not.

Speaker 4: Okay.

Speaker 3: So he has said that he had evidence.

Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I did, too. I mean, they were made public.

Speaker 3: Okay.

Speaker 4: Collins and Fauci, as soon as they found out that PSS and Immunity Bio were in Operation Warp Speed.

Speaker 3: I think I did.

Speaker 4: They immediately kicked them out.

Speaker 3: Yeah. And also told them that they could not continue their research, period. And that's when PSS.

Speaker 4: It's not a conspiracy. It's a fact.

Speaker 3: It is. It is. And the saddest thing is, you know, Biden, when he was vice president, uh initiated the Cancer Moonshot in conversation with PSS but then iced him out of any functioning role within it and Cancer Moonshot went was a program went absolutely nowhere and that was 10 years ago more then yep you know it breaks my heart that Aniva has existed since 2012.

Speaker 4: Well, hopefully NCCN comes through here in the next 30 days and at least gives us a thumbs up on papillary. I believe that'll be about a 3x TAM.

Speaker 3: I think four. So I think we have 20% of bladder cancer and their papillary is the other 80.

Speaker 4: Yep, you could be totally right. I always try to be conservative.

Speaker 3: Yeah, that would be phenomenal news and that could come any day. You know, and it's again, any.

Speaker 4: Day, along with the EU. The EU should be approving here in the next week.

Speaker 3: Any moment. And these are, this is again, the NCCN, I think is another pathway that Patrick Soon Xiang has taken to sidestep the FDA. Because I believe that if the NCCN makes the recommendation, then it can be prescribed for off-label use. It's because it's We currently have the one bladder cancer indication. It could be described for the for the other papillary bladder cancer indication off label and covered by insurance. So even if it's not FDA approved for that indication, it can be prescribed and covered by insurance. And like, yes, but only that indication. Right. Only that indication. But that's what the NCCN could do for us. Yep. And that's massive news. I also I still think that it would be a slower uptake than if we got Approval of that indication and instead of a refusal to file and then whatever you remember last year, Patrick Soon Song said, oh, you know, we had requested a type A meeting and then. Or yeah, so it was the beginning of last year. They had a meeting with the FDA and the FDA said, oh, file file. And so we did. And then we received, we received the refusal to file in May. And, uh, and then Patrick soon Shang requested a type a meeting to review that. And, you know, that was towards the end of last year, but he, he was ******. Uh, he's been making a media blitz, but, you know, he, we received bad news and oh, he, he spoke on it in several of the interviews when he's talking about, he had this meeting and he's explaining his, well, what if it was your father? And, um, had the response from the FDA is, I don't care, you know, It's a really interesting thing, but it's, there are a lot of things that need to line up and it, with my experience, it could take another two years or it could happen incredibly rapidly. You know, it just depends on who's willing to start making changes. But it's definitely here. And when we know, and if Saudi goes for, if they do a lymphopenia approval, even in experimental use, that's going to be absolutely massive because we're going to start, we're going to have data within six months, strong data with a massive patient pool that it's going to be undeniable. And Patrick Soon Chong has said that in tweets recently, unstoppable. And we'll get there. You know, I think fully matured, this could be a trillion dollar pharmaceutical company. You know, he bought or leased the manufacturing facility in New York, Dunkirk, in 2018, 2017. So he's had the foresight. But it's 2026 now. I don't think he would have done that. That was money that IBRX spent and we've continued to spend it on a facility that is doing any if they're doing anything at all, it's very limited. But way back then, almost 10 years ago, he thought he was going to need that production capacity. And so it just imagine the frustration that he has having, you know, because he wants to keep it in house and and not rely on third parties. And it makes sense. But when I think when they were making that move, um, you know, he must, they must have believed the leadership at IBRX must have believed we were within a year or two of reaching full, like a bigger scale of production and the necessity of having that facility. You know, so just like, it's just more icing on the cake, right? Like that the, the, the gates are shut and Yeah, Patrick Soon Shang is doing absolutely everything, I believe, in his power to bust them open. And, you know, it's I got to hand it to him. He's gotten very creative, you know, focusing on different angles and also bringing some of this information to the public, talking about it, speaking about, you know, because if nobody was ever made aware of what we're all looking at collectively, then none of us would really be here, you know. Josh, are you with us? I think we lost PC again as well. Josh must have stepped away from his counsel. If anybody wants to throw anything in chat to discuss, I can talk about what I know and believe. Other than that, we're going to have to wait for Josh to come back. to get PC back on.

Speaker 2: Hey, Edward, I was just wondering, are you, are you, I'm assuming you're an investor in immunity bio, are you an employee or?

Speaker 3: I'm only an investor. I found them, and I'm not giving any investment advice. I'm talking about my beliefs and the positions I've taken.