Disclaimer: I am not a financial advisor. I am not an analyst. I am not trained to pick stocks, nor to teach about the market. I am not a doctor, nor a biopharma expert. I have a B.A in Philosophy from a liberal arts school, and I suffer from permanent brain fog from years of overindulgence at that school. You truly, genuinely should NOT trust a single thing I say without verifying it for yourself first, because I am not the person to listen to on matters regarding stocks, options, or other financial advice. Or any advice, really.


VRNA PHARMA, MY PATH TO FUNDING MY PH.D

VRNA Pharma (VRNA) is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company that has only ever lost money, has a singular candidate product, and is at -29.56% over 3 months. I stumbled across this stock on TradingView by accident, trying to find a different stock. However, my indicators liked the way it looked, so I did a little more digging, and I ended up opening a position two days ago that is roughly 24.62% of my portfolio. I plan to expand that position in the coming weeks.
Here’s the argument: VRNA is relatively undervalued because of the psychological and statistical risks associated with biopharmaceutical companies.

I rely on several key points to demonstrate this argument.

VRNA’S SINGULAR CANDIDATE PRODUCT, ENSIFENTRINE, IS BASED ON ABOVE-AVERAGE SCIENCE
Ensifentrine (also known by its development code RPL554) is a novel, dual inhibitor of the enzymes phosphodiesterase 3 (PDE3) and phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) that is being proposed as a treatment for COPD. COPD, in layman’s terms, is the long-term inflammation of the blood vessels and airways in your lungs, which makes it significantly harder to breathe or catch your breath- demonstrably affecting a person’s quality of life. It also requires treatment intervention in order to effectively cope long-term.
I will cite the science below this explanation, because I am not qualified to try to even paraphrase it. However, I can explain why I believe ensifentrine is well-researched and grounded in good science, as well as properly argue for its efficacy.
I noted above that ensifentrine is a “novel, dual-inhibitor.” This means it is a) new/different from existing treatments and b) it inhibits the action of two enzymes at once. Enzymes are proteins in your body that act as catalysts to start, stop, slow down, or speed up various biochemical reactions necessary for bodily functions. So, in this context, the PDE3 enzyme is a protein that breaks down a different compound called cAMP (cyclical AMP), which plays a role in relaxing your muscles; so byinhibiting the PDE3 enzyme from being produced, ensifentrine relaxes your airway muscles, because the cAMP there is allowed to do its magic without being broken down by the PDE3. Simultaneously, ensifentrine also inhibits the PDE4 enzyme, which plays a role in your body’s inflammatory response. By inhibiting the PDE4 enzyme, the inflammatory response in a patient’s lungs can be reduced.
Ensifentrine is a unique and innovative treatment because it is the only COPD medication that targets two enzymes at once. This allows for patients to more easily and regularly follow through with treatment regimens, as they are not expected to take multiple medications/doses; it presents a pivotal point in respiratory drug development, as the interest in combined medications has grown by roughly 30% when measured by diagnoses and treatment plans prescribed by doctors; and further, it poses a lucrative opportunity to disrupt a market that has been stagnant for over a decade.
As a maintenance treatment for COPD, the drug has an extremely promising clinical trial history. Further, the drug is still in Phase II clinical trials as a combination treatment with LAMA (a treatment that opens up the bronchi, or little airways in your lungs, by relaxing the muscles) and as a treatment for other conditions, like asthma and cystic fibrosis.

Let’s focus for now on ensifentrine as a maintenance treatment for COPD. This means that it is a medication that is used to help a different, primary treatment succeed. The following analysis pertains to the Phase II – III trials of ensifentrine as a maintenance treatment for COPD.
The Phase IIa study (NCT03443414) showed significant improvements in lung function (FEV1) across all doses, with the highest efficacy at 3 mg, and a safety profile comparable to placebo. FEV1, or Forced Expiratory Volume in one second, measures how much air a patient can forcefully exhale in one second, indicating lung function. The Phase IIb study (NCT03937479) confirmed the 3 mg dose as optimal, showing significant improvements in FEV1, COPD symptoms, and quality of life, along with a reduction in exacerbation rates. The Phase III ENHANCE trials, ENHANCE-1 and ENHANCE-2, aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ensifentrine in a large COPD patient population. Both trials were multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, and placebo-controlled, conducted across 250 sites in 17 countries. ENHANCE-1 included 760 patients and showed a statistically significant improvement in FEV1 by 87 ml (P < 0.001) compared to placebo. The trial also reported improvements in COPD symptoms and quality of life, and a 36% reduction in the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations (rate ratio: 0.64; P = 0.050). Time to first exacerbation was significantly increased (hazard ratio: 0.62; P = 0.038), and adverse event rates were similar to placebo, indicating good tolerability. ENHANCE-2 involved 789 patients and mirrored the design of ENHANCE-1. It demonstrated a significant FEV1 improvement of 94 ml (P < 0.001) over placebo. Although improvements in symptoms and quality of life were not statistically significant in this trial, the exacerbation rate was reduced by a statistically significant 43% (rate ratio: 0.57; P = 0.009), and the time to first exacerbation was extended significantly as well (hazard ratio: 0.58; P = 0.009). Safety profiles were consistent with ENHANCE-1, reinforcing the reliability of ensifentrine as a COPD treatment.
There are two hiccups in these otherwise very, very promising studies. But before I move into those problems, I want to emphasize just how strong these results are. For a novel mechanism to demonstrate so strongly that it has a definitive effect on the symptomology of a disease that hasn’t seen novel treatment in over a decade is quite impressive.
Now, to the problems. First, a larger-than-average number of people dropped out of the studies. This is almost certainly in part because the studies were conducted throughout the course of the pandemic, which had a disproportionately large adverse effect on COPD and other respiratory patients. Second, and far less damning, the ENHANCE-2 study wasn’t able to demonstrate a statistically significant increase in quality of life (it just barely missed significance).
Both present their own reasons for ICER and/or the FDA to hesitate on giving ensifentrine high marks. ICER expressed explicit concerns about clinical trial participant dropout rates. However, they have also expressed a “high certainty” that ensifentrine provides a health benefit to the public, probably a large net health benefit, giving it an “incremental B+.” A key event to watch for comes on June 14, when CEPAC (a core entity of ICER) will release a report on the cost-effectiveness and public health benefits of ensifentrine. As of right now, they say ensifentrine will be “cost-effective” vis quality-of-life-years if it is priced between $7,500-$12,700. Perhaps this number will change, allowing it to be priced higher, producing better margins for VRNA.
The FDA is expected to make a decision on ensifentrine on June 26, 2024 (19 days). It seems incredibly likely that it will be approved – the science is strong, and while the arguments against the studies are sound, I do not think are hefty.

VRNA’S EXECUTIVE BOARD IS STRONG – ITS CLINICAL OPERATIONS MANAGERS HAVE A SOLID TRACK RECORD – SHARED HISTORY, GOALS, AND OUTLOOK AMONGST LEADERSHIP.

Before we get into the science, we can first look at the scientists who are working on ensifentrine.

A good portion of the executive chiefs, clinical staff, and other high-ranking officials share a common career history, having worked at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a different biopharma research company together. “Ensifentrine was co-invented by Sir David Jack, former head of research at GlaxoSmithKline, who made many significant contributions to respiratory medicine including pioneering the development of salbutamol, still one of the most widely prescribed bronchodilators for asthma today, and the first inhaled steroid, beclomethasone. After Sir Jack left GSK, he focused on seeking a single molecule that would combine both bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory activity, leading to the discovery of ensifentrine. Patents on the work were assigned to Vernalis Plc and later acquired by Rhinopharma Ltd. In 2006, Rhinopharma was recapitalized and renamed VRNA Pharma.”


Kathleen Rickard – Chief Medical Officer at VRNA Pharma. Dr. Rickard is an MD with 3+ decades of respiratory medicine under her belt and has been with VRNA since 2019, overseeing multiple phases of clinical trials. In the past, Dr. Rickard directed clinical trials and regulatory strategies for the respiratory asthma medication NIOX V---, which successfully cleared regulatory hurdles and entered the international market. Further, ”…Dr Rickard was Vice President Clinical Development and Medical Affairs of GlaxoSmithKline’s Respiratory Medicines Development Centre and, over a period of 15 years, held a number of other leadership positions in clinical development across GlaxoSmithKline’s global respiratory franchise…”
Supporting Dr. Rickard in global clinical developments is:
Nina Church – Executive Director of Global Clinical Development. ”Ms. Church brings 30 years of experience of late-stage clinical drug development in respiratory therapeutics, with 25 years at GlaxoSmithKline where she held a series of management positions, including Director, Global Operations COPD. At GlaxoSmithKline, Ms. Church was involved in the development of many respiratory therapeutics including Advair^®, Anoro^®, Flovent^®, Serevent^® and Ventolin^®. She joins from Parion Sciences where she was Executive Director, Clinical Operations.”

Nancy Herje – Senior Director of Clinical Operations. “Ms. Herje has more than 25 years of experience in designing, planning and executing clinical programs for pharmaceutical and medical device companies including trials for the COPD therapeutic Flovent^®. Prior to joining VRNA Pharma, Nancy was a Senior Clinical Scientist at ExecuPharm and previously held roles at Chimerix, Aerocrine, Inspire and GlaxoSmithKline.”
The least impressive, and probably least important in my estimation, is the CEO, David Zaccardelli. He, as far as I can tell, does not have a long history with the other board members, and does not seem to hold a super impressive record as an executive leader. He does, however, have a Ph.D in biopharmaceuticals and not business, so that may be why.
However, what is interesting to note is that Zaccardelli sold around $1.175 million worth of VRNA shares when right before the stock dropped about 50% in a month, in September of 2023. Many other insiders sold large quantities of VRNA at that time as well.
Two insiders, Martin Edwards and David Debsworth bought a combined 200,000 shares the November, right before the price rallied and recovered, netting them a roughly 110% gain over two months (had they bought at market price- they didn’t, so it was a lot more than 110% gain).
What I hope to point out here is that the executive board is a cohesive unit, with a long history of successful projects together. They share similar views, outlooks, and ostensibly goals. They each individually have a strong foundation in the industry, and all have proven track records with respiratory medications. Further, they telegraph relatively clearly when they think shit is about to hit the fan- or perhaps when they’ve struck gold.

The Market for COPD Drugs is Lucrative, and Analysts Have a Very Positive Outlook
COPD is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States, third leading cause of death in the world, and roughly 6% of the U.S population has a diagnosis- but there are probably many more unreported cases. Further, there have been no novel COPD treatments released in the last decade- they all rely on pre-existing treatments or compounds. However, the ones that have been developed demonstrate that the market niche is active and lucrative. “According to Vantage Market Research, the GlobalAsthma and COPD Drugs Market is estimated to be valued at USD 57.56 Billion by 2032 at an exponential growth of 4.9% in the next eight years.” It is important to note that a majority of that value is in ((asthma andCOPD treatments) + exclusively asthma treatments), whereas the value of the exclusively COPD drug market is probably less than half of that value. This is for various reasons; the two main ones are that there are more medications which people with either condition can take than there are medications which only a person with asthma or only a person with COPD can take; and combined treatments, in which patients are administered several different treatments, are finding increased prevalence. Further, there are simply more children/young adults with asthma than there are with COPD. However, this leads me into my next subpoint.
Vantage Market Research might even be underestimating the market, as when I checked their insights, they spoke primarily of increased pollution and urbanization, smoking/vaping trends, and aging patterns. I did not see a single mention of COVID (I did not pay for the premium version though). There is growing evidence that being infected with COVID-19, especially if the infection was severe, increases the chances of developing COPD or other chronic adult-onset respiratory conditions. The number of people with this condition is only going to grow with time- whether under the influence of the trends that VMR identified, or COVID, or both. The market, as the callous research would indicate, will grow healthily alongside them. And further, Verna Pharma is currently conducting follow up studies on ensifentrine efficacy for patients affected by long COVID. If approved for COPD, the funding is secured for further R&D and IP development.
And finally, my last point is a financial analysis followed by a brief and limited technical analysis.
VRNA is in a good financial position and nearing the floor which cometh before the ATH
As I stated above, VRNA “…has incurred recurring losses and negative cash flows from operations since inception, and has an accumulated deficit of $414.4 million as of March 31, 2024. The Company expects to incur additional losses and negative cash flows from operations until its products potentially gain regulatory approval and reach commercial profitability, if at all.” The company’s operational losses alone totaled roughly $27.2 million dollars. However, because of frequent equity offerings, “(t)he Company expects that its cash and cash equivalents as of March 31, 2024, will be sufficient to fund its operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for at least the next 12 months from the date of issuance.” Further, it should be noted that VRNA took on a loan of $400 million in 2023 from Oxford Finance, LLC in order to continue financing its costly R&D and clinical trials. This loan is collected in batches of $50-100 million dollars over the course of 5 terms.
Another very interesting term loan facility that VRNA has entered into is with Oaktree Finance. This loan also totals up for an aggregate $400 million, available in “tranches” that become accessible as certain criteria and thresholds are met. Tranche B, worth about $70 million, will be released to VRNA eight business days after ensifentrine receives FDA approval, if it is approved before September 30, 2024. Another $75 million will be released to VRNA if certain sales milestones are met before December 31, 2025. Other tranches will become available later on, as well. In order to finance this loan, Oaktree put a lien on “substantially all” of VRNA’s assets, including its intellectual property. Verna Pharma, in my estimation, sees right now as the make-or-break, pivotal moment for the company. If they can’t secure FDA approval now, the likelihood they receive it before the September 30^thdeadline for the Tranche B loan to be released is very low, and the company will spiral quickly from there. However, if they secure FDA approval, this funding will be the engine of the commercialization phase, allowing for scaling and partnerships.
The good news here is that, despite its immense debt obligations, there is a floor for VRNA given the company’s available cash on hand. Further, there is strong institutional sentiment that VRNA will succeed – somewhere around 80% of shares are institutionally owned. It has received the necessary funding to continue operating, and as long as it doesn’t miss FDA approval on June 26, it should stay well-funded throughout its commercialization efforts.
GO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH.
Let’s look at the charts. I want to emphasize again, I am new to trading; I am new to technical analysis; I am so new that to even say I am learning is kind of overstating it.
https://preview.redd.it/fleqstt5td5d1.png?width=2666&format=png&auto=webp&s=7a1d4df5a48dafe32d545a7a960b9d24400efe97
First, a brief overview. This is a 1 month chart of VRNA. We see a nice bullish falling wedge after a large upswing. You’ll notice a big player(s) swapped 100million shares in July of 2020. I have the VWAP anchored there to demonstrate big fish positioning and to try to sniff out their moves. We see the price respect the middle VWAP band after breaking through on the upswing. Further, we see a valid support get tested three times, and we are now sitting just above it, but have crashed through the middle VWAP band. I smell a breakout. (I know nothing please do your own research and tell me if my technical analysis is bad.
(SEE IMAGE BELOW)
We are now looking at a bi-weekly chart. I first want to show that the price has properly retraced the swing and is now entering a buy-signal territory. This is confirmed to me by the TrendStrengthIndicators, StochasticMomentum, and RelativeStrengthIndicators indicators flashing reversal. I suspect we pivot back up soon.
It is worth noting here that analyst ratings of VRNA are also saying it’s time to buy. Jefferies, H.C. Wainwright, Canaccord Genuity, Truist Financial, BTIG, Piper Sandler, Wedbush have all assigned or re-iterated a strong buy rating- and all of them predict a $30-$36 price point for a 149-199% upside potential.

CONCLUSION

I have about 24.62% of my portfolio in VRNA right now. (SEE IMAGE BELOW) I plan to expand this position when I get paid:
-If price crashes to the second gold fib band and holds
-An hour before close on 06/13, the day before CEPAC is set to release their report
-An hour before close on 06/25, the day before PDUFA Action Date (When the FDA will decide if ensifentrine is approved or not


I will gradually sell increasing fib bands as the price increases, starting at a +50% gain.



(SEE WORKS CITED BELOW)



I really hope to get some good feedback. I am very good at receiving feedback and understanding where my analysis has gone wrong – I am very excited to hear what everyone thinks about the play. If this is, somehow, good analysis, I might share other due diligences I have done on stocks I think are good opportunities.

News about GME also so true about AMC buy and HODL! TO ANYOJNE WHO THINKS THIS IS NOT RELEVANT WITH AMC.... you are a fool likely to know that ANY HF that have to liquidate others to close another position it looks as if they have left there self highly vulnerable include all AMC swaps and short positions and you yourself have a serious parabolic event with the market... get the powder ready because blue chip stocks will fall immediately for they will have to liquidate many LONG positions in order to satisfy the short positions... this in itself is confirmed... whats good for the goose is good for the gander... whats good for AMC is good for GME Etc.
https://preview.redd.it/klrwueqkod5d1.jpg?width=819&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a71bdac7fc9986c4346315bf62cfd0293ded1292

https://preview.redd.it/tb1syoedod5d1.jpg?width=1792&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=82a0f26bfc7e7bc0fbf2f8fe6e1c3ff8f0a43624
Electric bikes are having their moment.
They’re the eco-conscious, traffic-dodging answer to the daily grind.
But when it comes to the Jasion EB5, a model that's been generating buzz for its affordability, is it just cheap thrills or a commuter's salvation?
Buckle up, because we're about to find out.

Update:

BEST PRICE on the Jasion EB5 Electric Bike here:
https://amzn.to/3Vwj9fQ

Jasion EB5: First Impressions

Let me tell you, this e-bike doesn't exactly scream "luxury." It's got a minimalist design that's more function over form. But hey, that's not necessarily a bad thing.
I've ridden my share of bikes, and sometimes, the simpler, the better. The matte black frame is sleek enough, and the whole thing feels surprisingly light, like it's ready to spring into action.
The first thing I noticed was how easy it was to assemble. If you've ever wrestled with IKEA furniture, fear not. The Jasion EB5 comes mostly pre-assembled. The instructions are clear, and within 15 minutes, I was ready to roll.
Now, let's talk about that first ride. I hopped on, twisted the throttle, and felt that familiar surge of electric power. Not bad. It's not going to blow your hair back like a Harley, but it's definitely got some pep.
The pedal assist kicked in smoothly, and before I knew it, I was cruising down the road with a shit-eating grin on my face, feeling like a kid on Christmas morning.

Key Features: The Devil's in the Details

350W Motor and LCD Display: The 350W motor is the heart of this beast. It’s not the most powerful on the market, but it’s more than enough for city commutes and moderate hills. The LCD display is your command center. It’s clear, easy to read, and gives you all the essential info – speed, battery life, and pedal assist level.
Removable 360Wh Battery: This is a game-changer. You can easily detach the battery and charge it indoors, which is a major convenience. Jasion claims a range of 25-40 miles, but as always, your mileage may vary depending on how much you rely on the motor and the terrain.
Multiple Riding Modes: The EB5 offers four modes: pedal assist (like having a tailwind at your back), pure electric (for those days when you just can't be bothered), pedal-only (if you're feeling masochistic), and a booster mode for tackling those pesky uphill climbs (like a shot of espresso for your legs). The pedal assist has three levels, so you can customize the amount of effort you want to put in.

Pros: What Makes the Jasion EB5 Shine

Affordability: Let’s face it, e-bikes can be damn expensive. The Jasion EB5 is a breath of fresh air for budget-minded riders. It offers a lot of bang for your buck.
Ease of Assembly and Use: Even if you're not a bike whiz, you'll have this thing up and running in no time. The controls are intuitive, and the bike itself is surprisingly easy to handle.
Commuter-Friendly Features: The removable battery, multiple riding modes, and decent range make this a practical choice for daily commutes. It's also relatively lightweight, which is a bonus if you need to carry it up stairs or onto public transport.

Cons: Where the Jasion EB5 Falls Short

Build Quality: Let's not kid ourselves – this isn’t a high-end e-bike. Some of the components feel a bit flimsy, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some parts need replacing sooner rather than later.
Battery Life: While the removable battery is convenient, the range might be a bit underwhelming for longer rides. If you're planning on tackling serious hills or going on extended adventures, you might want to look elsewhere.
Limited Accessories: The EB5 doesn't come with many extras. You’ll need to invest in a phone mount, a lock, and maybe even a rear rack if you plan on carrying cargo.

Comparison: Jasion EB5 vs. the Competition

The EB5’s main competitors are other budget-friendly e-bikes like the Ancheer Power Plus and the Swagtron EB5 Pro.
Both offer similar features and performance, but the Jasion EB5 edges them out with its slightly lighter weight and more user-friendly display. Overall, I gotta say I prefer this.

Final Verdict: Is the Jasion EB5 Worth It?

The Jasion EB5 isn't for everyone.
It's not the most refined or feature-packed e-bike out there, but it’s a solid choice for beginners and budget-conscious riders.
If you’re looking for a reliable, easy-to-use e-bike for commuting or casual rides, the Jasion EB5 might just be your ticket to freedom.

Best Price On Jasion EB5

I've found you the current best deal on the Jasion EB5, so be sure to follow the link below so you don't get gouged paying full retail:
https://amzn.to/3Vwj9fQ

Not financial advice.
Rather than guessing or betting what happens on Monday or next week, or even next month, let's use fundamentals to see where this could go in the next quarter or three.
Chart
https://preview.redd.it/3x98cd2hid5d1.png?width=1590&format=png&auto=webp&s=76b257e6488c41e87c84767baca4f71ca431ad6e
The bottom graph is just the NASDAQ (QQQ) and SP500.
The green line in the top graph shows NVDA forward PE ratio over the same period of time as the bottom graph. Forward PE is the stock price divided by expected earnings. We can see that NVDA FPE ranges from mid 20s to 70, but currently is around 40.
In other words, if NVDA PE goes from 40 to 60, the SP will increase 50%, without any changes to NVDA performance. This happens because the market has decided that NVDA is worth more, simply because its income is worth 50% more. For example, this can happen if interest rates drop, and investors move to stocks to get the returns that interest rates no longer provide.
Analysis
If we can predict FPE and know what NVDA profits will be, we'll know what SP will be. Predicting profits is easy because NVDA hits ER guidance >90% of the time. Let's look at FPE.
FPE changes whenever the SP changes, but it is correlated with macros. In this case we'll use QQQ / SP500. When QQQ drops (e.g. market correction), NVDA FPE drops. It doesn't even need to drop much sometimes. But when QQQ rises keeps rising (e.g. bull run), NVDA FPE eventually reaches the 60s.
When people are happy with the rising market, they pile in with FOMO and stock prices go up. When they're scared, they pull out and SP drops. Even if nothing changed with the company prospects or fundamentals, the SP goes up or down based on sentiment.
Opportunity
NVDA FPE is close to 40 today. If the macros continue to do well (QQQ bull run), FPE for NVDA could hit 60 or 70. That along would increase NVDA by 50%. However, that might take another quarter or three. By then, NVDA forward profits should be higher.
The astonishing implication is that if profits increase 30% by the time this happens, SP could increase 1.5 x 1.3 = 95% higher than today, or $2300 a share! Plug in your own numbers. Using
Risks
Lots of things can go wrong. Maybe FPE will fail to correlate. Maybe FPE won't go as high this time. Maybe interest rates are increased, halting the bull market causing QQQ to drop. Maybe NVDA income or sales stall. Alien invasion from outer space.
Whatever the reason, an overall market pullback could drive NVDA FPE to 20s, cutting the price in half. You can use other metrics like RSI as well. Always revalidate your assumptions and be watchful.
However, using FPE can also help manage risks. It gives you an idea of where any bottom is likely to be. For example, NVDA doesn't seem to ever fall below 20s FPE, so that puts a bottom to any pullback if NVDA profits remain where they are. You can use this to make more confident investments to improve your returns.
NFA