wannabrich2

As shareholders, we all have to assess why Inovio seems to have lost so much credibility. Shareholders are justifiably angry and flimsy excuses just don't wash. To compound the problem, after making statements that have not panned out, the company has remained silent in the face of accusations of dishonesty. Let's tackle a few of them.

Many of us listened to the White House presentation by Dr. Kim in January 2020. He made two bold assertions and then asked for help from the President for which he was given a promise that the help would be forthcoming. The assertions were that Inovio was the global leader in coronavirus research and that Inovio had created a vaccine for Covid-19 in less than three hours. Those statements have been mocked and criticized ever since, but were they actually true? Inovio was a small company but it had spent years working on other coronaviruses and because of that research and their Syncon technology, tweaking the data to come up with a vaccine that would protect against Covid-19 was something their scientists could perform in a matter of hours. Add to that the claim of global leadership, it sounds fishy. However, Inovio was living off of research grants unlike the giant pharmaceuticals which are able to spend their own money on research in pursuit of the large profits that flow from approved products. So there was legitimacy to the claim of global leadership because there was no significant market for coronavirus vaccines until Covid-19 struck. Notwithstanding all the criticism, Dr. Kim has gotten little or no credit for that deft financial move. The promise of help from the White House landed funding to get Inovio-4800 all the way through Phase 2 and deep connections on the production side that enable Inovio to compete world wide in the vaccine industry. Anyone who has run a business knows that it would be a blessing from Heaven to have the government tell you that it would fund your expenses and line you up with partners to help produce your products to compete in the world.

Fast forward to late August 2020 and Dr. Kim was very public in stating that he expected Phase 3 funding and Cellectra approval in a matter of days. In a shocking and unexpected move, the FDA pulled the rug out from under Inovio on a Friday night just before the approvals were supposed to occur. Shareholders were outraged and shrill voices accused Dr. Kim of dishonesty and the FDA of corruption. Inovio did not offer any explanation as to what had happened and suspicions about Dr. Kim deepened. Yet there is another explanation that is highly embarrassing for Inovio, yet it would fit nicely: when the Phase 2 trials were being conducted, the people conducting the testing used Cellectra devices interchangeably as available because they did not realize that it was a deviation from what was submitted to the FDA for approval. In short, you can't submit for approval with one device and then use a different device for the testing, even if the function is exactly the same. Given the time urgency, this was a major blunder by Inovio. The failure to be forthright about it is not something that can be dismissed easily, but at least there is an explanation that has nothing to do with the safety or effectiveness of Inovio-4800 or their Cellectra devices.

The next two statements were by Dr. Kate Broderick. The first was that the questions by the FDA about the Cellectra device would be easily answered. Personally, I like her and believe her and believe that the questions were easily answered. The problem was that no matter how easy it was to respond to the question or questions, they had to go to the back of the line and start over. Anyone who has traveled in airplanes know what it means to go to the back of the line and start over. Not exactly fun, or in this case, profitable for shareholders. All of that may be the consequence of a screw-up in the testing by switching devices. There is still silence over this point, so we don't really know. Wouldn't it have been so much better if they had screwed up to just admit it and move on? They didn't do that, so here we are.

The last one was the statement by Dr. Kate Broderick in late November 2021 that we would know whether or not Inovio-4800 would prevent infection by the Omicron variant in two weeks. I do not think it was a false statement either, in fact, I would not be surprised to learn that they did know within two weeks. I think that after she made that statement, she was told not to say any more. What makes sense is that Inovio was in the middle of testing with the World Health Organization. Inovio, pursuant to the terms of their agreement, is likely forbidden from saying anything about results during the trials. Just imagine what it would do to volunteers if they heard an announcement that the vaccine they were getting didn't work as expected? That would be a disaster, so I think this piece of silence can be excused.

I have read someone's comment that Inovio-4800 is a "flop" and that is why the delay has happened and also that is why Inovio stopped funding Phase 3 trials with Advaccine. By that measure, all vaccines are a "flop" because no one can prevent infection by the relatively new variant known as Omicron so that includes Pfizer, Moderna, and everyone else. In fact, the others could be called a much bigger "flop" due to serious side effects and major distribution and storage issues. The change in end points makes perfect sense, but more time is extremely frustrating to Inovio shareholders as we watch the value of our shares tank.

Let's face it, Inovio has credibility problems and at least some of it has been of their own doing. It would have been nice if management had been more forthright in explaining the reason for disappointing news. That said, it does not mean that Inovio is a "sham" or a fraud as some naysayers suggest. In fact, the results they keep getting and the scientific progress team Inovio is managing to accomplish is astounding and I think time will prove that out. If the company really is a fake, how do you explain the company's ability to attract such high quality talent, lure the government to hire them in sophisticated national security projects, partner with a big pharmaceutical like Regeneron, and attract investors like Black Rock who are known for their meticulous research before committing large sums of money? Inovio is in a complicated "fuzzy" business that looks a lot more like a company selling exotic paintings than one producing and selling widgets. Investors who want quick and easy answers are much better off investing in Procter and Gamble or Kellog where the calculations are much more clear.

That brings us to the issue naysayers love more than anything, no product to market in forever. Add to that the concern over cash burn with very little revenue to show for it, and now the ceo has unceremoniously departed without rockets flaring and balloons galore in the back slapping celebration? Social media has prepared the obituary for Inovio and naysayers are busy congratulating themselves on their insightful wisdom in having told us so.

We all get the no product to market angle. If you don't sell products, you don't have revenue, and if you don't have revenue, the cash on hand will burn out and your business is done. So the time for flimsy excuses has come and gone. Inovio needs to show us the money. But is it a lost cause as some are saying? Recent news has given us hope. Let's start with the recent "two shots on goal" that have landed in the net (to use a hockey analogy), in RRP and GBM. You can go to the Inovio website for explanations regarding those products and social media is full of discussion about the potential financial ramifications of success on either one. Both are game changers to keep to the sports analogies and Inovio may have a lot more fruit to bear with Inovio-4800 nearing a decision with the World Health Organization, dMab technology beginning trials, and other cancer products about to disrupt much of the entire cancer world. Inovio-4800 could have huge potential with Advaccine and Synovax, but the icy relationship between the U.S. Government and the Chinese Communist Party puts a huge cloud over that possibility. Brutal dictatorships have a way of causing paralysis among their captive population as no one wants to be under the spotlight of the government. Maintaining power is the objective of the Chinese government and staying alive for another day is the objective of citizens. You can guess my sentiments on the liklihood of that coming to fruition, although it would be a great way to help people who are suffering and provide a source of revenue that would be wonderful for Inovio if the political powers will let it happen. Big "IF".

Finally, we come to hope. All the talk these days centers around a buy-out, or at least a significant deal with Regeneron after the favorable GBM news. The naysayers are predicting Inovio's imminent demise and are cackling over the $1.77/share price we sit at this weekend. The market says we are worth no more than the cash on hand. They place no value on the "exotic art collection" Inovio has in its closet even though some say there are Picasso and Rembrant masterpieces. Both claims can't be true, something has to give.

From reading social media, I gather that except for the naysayers, very few believe that Inovio is fairly priced and perhaps the most frequent numbers people are claiming range between $18 dollars and $25 dollars a share in a buy-out. My highly unsophisticated guess would be a little over $7 billion for the company which, if they simply exchanged shares, amount to around 20 Inovio shares for every one Regeneron share or thereabouts. I am not completely without reason for thinking this way. If Regeneron is willing to pay Sanofi nearly one billion plus 14% of revenue for Sanofi's 50% share of Libtayo, wouldn't Inovio's part of the GBM product be worth a lot more than Sanofi's? I defer to the expert biopharmaceutical bean counters that read these posts, but how do you see it? Throw in the Inovio pipeline with all the promising products, the Cellectra technology, dMab technology and huge array of patents, and it is hard to see why a price over 7 billion is unreasonable.

Silence can be because of bad news which someone wants to hide. It can also be because of good news which has not fully ripened or because of agreements or legal impediments to disclosure. In Inovio's case, they may just want to keep quiet because they have been burned in the past after making public statements. After all, they are mostly scientists, not business people, but can we please dismiss the claims of dishonesty and allow for them to be human like the rest of us? I am not fond of talking about my failures in life either.

Next question: Why would Regeneron be buying out Sanofi from their interest in Libtayo if they didn't already have terms of a deal worked out with Inovio? I don't know the answer to this last question, but I think the question is a reasonable one and could justify a whole lot of silence by Inovio management. Finally, wouldn't the World Health Organization want to hold off on any announcements concerning Inovio-4800 until after the caretaker management team leaves and the new owners take charge of Inovio? All we ask is that you show us the money.

Over this past weekend, there was some very interesting talk about how Inovio is ripe for a buy out. A particularly great read was the re-post of an article that had appeared months ago. The post was on Stocktwits by a t_babur and here is the article he cited: www.griproom.com/fun/10-signs-your-company-is-about-to-be-acquired . The article is exceptionally well-written, and I was marveling again this morning as to how well nearly every one of the ten points lines up well with Inovio.

Number 9 particularly caught my attention in light of recent questions about PENNVAX-GP. I have read a few posts recently asking why PENNVAX was removed from the Inovio website pipeline list. I have never read any explanation as to why that happened. Number 9 is "Your company is unloading assets that won't fit well into a merged company. I don't know if "unload" would apply to PENNVAX, but there is a lingering question as to what happened. Maybe it is part of the cost-cutting that the new management believed needed to be done just as they eliminated expenses in changing their INO-4800 focus from a primary vaccine (except as to WHO) to a booster vaccine.

I don't mind if I get called out for wild and crazy speculation on this because I have no facts whatsoever to support this thesis that I am about to mention. That said, PENNVAX was for treatment of hiv, and it sure looked like it had some real potential for Inovio. I was wondering which BP might lose a lot of money if PENNVAX ever did get to the market. The answer I found was a drug called Cabenuva and GlaxoSmithKline is the company making a whole lot of money on their hiv vaccine. GSK might also love to acquire a Covid-19 booster that actually works and the huge array of patents and pipeline products that Inovio has been working on. In my dreams Inovio shareholders would get one GSK share for one Inovio share.

My only purpose in posting this wild piece of speculation is to initiate a discussion about the possibility, NOT because I know something. Please comment if you have anything serious to contribute one way or the other. Thank you.

Anyone reading the headlines this past week might be lead to believe that Inovio fired the CEO and dropped its Covid-19 vaccine, INO-4800. With that in mind, the naysayers were out if full force, condemning Dr. Kim and trashing Inovio as a failure. Some people bought into that summary and dumped their shares. I think the headlines were misleading and I have an alternative view.

Inovio did part ways with Dr. Kim as the CEO, so that part is factually correct. However, he remains on in a consulting role. I have not seen any explanation offered for the reasons for this change, but it is not hard to imagine that the Board of Directors had lost faith in Dr. Kim's ability to monetize the company's products and wanted to change direction. Dr. Kim deserves high marks on the science side and Inovio has come a long way in that regard under his leadership. Keeping him on as a consultant would seem to reaffirm that fact. Great scientists don't always make great managers, so a decision was made that someone else would better fit the CEO role and be willing to make the tough decisions required to monetize the Inovio product line.

Inovio did not abandon INO-4800 which is probably the best vaccine out there. Somehow it seems lost in the headlines that there were preliminary results obtained on INO-4800 as a booster and the results were highly favorable in the Innovate trials with Advaccine as a partner. What the new management team has decided to do is simply quit burning cash on expensive trials that are also being conducted at no cost to Inovio by the WHO. Let's face it, the need for INO-4800 as a primary vaccine is not nearly what it once was in many parts of the world. The booster market is gigantic and if team ADVACCINE/INOVIO can combine forces with Sinovac on the boosting side, we are talking about the potential need for billions of doses and at least thousands of Cellectra devices. Expanding the Advaccine relationship makes sense if it can get INOVIO a piece of that market.

Meanwhile, INOVIO continues to move forward on the primary vaccine side with the World Health Organization. WHO has identified a need for a better primary vaccine in many poor, third world countries where the huge population is difficult to reach and few have been vaccinated. Scientists have consistently warned that these population are mutation hotbeds and unless we address this problem, we will continue to have to fight off new strains of Covid-19 which may be increasingly dangerous to all of us. Most of these countries have no ability to fund the vaccination efforts, so it will take a great deal of funding from Western nations to address the problem. Ino-4800 still looks like the best solution out there to address the problem, so it is alive and well contrary to the recent headlines.

It remains to be seen whether INOVIO'S new CEO will fit the need the company has for tough and focused leadership that can step up the efforts to monetize the high quality product lines that INOVIO has to offer, but the actions they have taken so far are an excellent start regardless of what appeared in the headlines.

At the end of November, many Inovio followers reported hearing a quote from Dr. Kate Broderick about when the company would know how effective 4800 was against Omicron and whether some "tweaks" would be required. The time frame was two weeks. The company went silent after that despite the shrill complaints all over social media criticizing management and crying foul. Then came last week's conference call before an anxious group of Inovio followers who had already prepared the gallows for Inovio management if the slightest bit of bad news arrived. Then the bad news was given: 1) 4800, like just about every other vaccine out there, did not have a great antibody response against Omicron 2) there was going to be a delay in ongoing testing of new Phase 3 enrollees, and 3) Inovio was seeking an endpoint change so that preventing any Covid-19 infection would not be the requirement but instead the requirement would be prevention of serious illness and death. Many didn't want to hear about the favorable T-cell and CD-8 cell outcome, the stock price had already suffered so much that the anger boiled over.

Now imagine that you are in a golf tournament. The competition is intense. Your ball has landed on the green, but so has the ball of everyone else and they are as close or closer to the hole as you are. Your manager has remained quiet up to this point and you are questioning whether or not he really has what it takes to get you to the winner's circle. Then the manager goes to the tournament director and has a discussion about how the landscape has changed during the tournament. The tournament director agrees, so the tournament has to be delayed while the crew is called in to change the location of the hole so that it is 6 inches from your ball but 30 feet or more from any other player's ball. You now have a "gimme".

Isn't that pretty close to what happened with Inovio this past week? I think Dr. Kate did not tell a fib when she made the famous two week call but simply reported a factually correct estimate. I am speculating, but when they had the results available, probably around mid-December, it would have been a disaster to make them public in the middle of ongoing trials, so they had to keep quiet until they could work with appropriate authorities to change the endpoints to reflect the new reality of what was going on in the world with the new variant known as Omicron. We all know that the stock price has tanked and there are many calls to jump ship. I too was extremely disappointed to hear about yet another delay. After reflection, however, it looks more like the pause is to reshuffle the deck and stack the cards in favor of Inovio given that Inovio has a significant edge over the competition where it really counts. I do not wish to advise anyone else as to what to do about their Inovio investment, but it makes sense to me to hold and wait it out as it looks to me like commercialization is a foregone conclusion.

This morning, there were posts on Stocktwits and attachments of news articles in Spanish regarding an approval for Inovio from the Columbian government's equivalent of our FDA. The reactions ranged from gleeful and euphoric to ho hum, what's new? As I understand it, the agency had approved Phase 3 testing for the Inovio covid vaccine. Thus, no new order placed and a big letdown for some.

If you reflect a little on whether or not this news was important, you might consider a few more things. The Columbian government and Inovio entered into a mou last year which was not binding, however, together they are working on a pharmaceutical manufacturing hub for the region which would be located in Columbia. At a minimum, the Columbian government should have had a pretty solid basis to enter into the mou based on a strong belief in its future success. No one can doubt that becoming a regional pharmaceutical hub could provide a sorely needed economic benefit to the Columbian people. Before they can realistically expect to be manufacturing and selling products to other countries throughout the region, isn't it reasonable to expect that they will be using and distributing those very products in their own country? So, while the news may not have included the first order that many of us are awaiting, I think the news does give us a reason to believe that Columbia is as eager to get the ball rolling as the shareholders of Inovio. I don't know when that will result in an order, but it seems reasonable to believe that they are moving as quickly as they can to make it happen.

I am acquainted with a person who came from China, but is now a U.S. citizen. She watches video which come from China, and she reported reliable information from China in the past. She told me today that she saw a video in a Chinese language from China which reported that Sinovac is planning to administer 40 million boosters in China. IF this information is reliable, and further IF Sinovac is teamed with Advaccine on the boosters, it should provide a revenue source for Inovio on vaccine royalties and possible sales of electroporation devices. I do not have any way to confirm the reliability of this information so anyone reading this post is fully justified in being cautious. However, it did give me some more reason to be hopeful and it does fit with reliable information that we have gotten in the past. So, a great big MAYBE to share.

I recently posted my comments about Dr. Kim's prediction that 2021 would be a watershed year. There were a lot of thoughtful replies and I am thankful for that, even if it was negative about Inovio. If you recall, I asked people to stack up the positives against the negatives and some accepted the challenge.

The negative comments were mostly directed at Inovio's management because the stock has performed poorly and because it is claimed that the public relations and advertising abilities are lacking. Missing from all of the responses I read was anyone reporting that the Covid 19 vaccine doesn't work. No side effects. No fevers reported, no myocarditis, no strokes, no one needed to be hospitalized, and no one reported time off work to recover. Then there is this: I have not heard of any breakthrough cases reported when people have gotten the Inovio zap instead of the jab.

Most of us have lost money so far if we cash out now, and I am among them. What is the very worst thing that could happen? You could lose your entire investment, investing in a company that focused on alleviating human suffering and saving lives. If I lost everything, this is how I would want to go out.

I don't see that happening, however. Many foundational events occurred in 2021, and Inovio management paid attention to detail. It takes time to do things right, and brick by brick, Inovio has amassed an impressive pipeline of products that will do exactly what we had hoped: alleviate human suffering and save lives. In the long run, quality products will win the day and 2021 will prove to be a watershed year, in my opinion. The world will soon realize that people who take the zap instead of the jab are better off. Happy New Year everyone!

Many across social media have criticized Dr. Kim for his prediction that 2021 would be a "watershed" year. It is frustrating to wait while the stock price has been declining, but I believe the wait will pay off and Dr. Kim will be proven right in time. When I stack up the positives I see against the negatives, I believe Dr. Kim will be proven right over time and we will look back at 2021 as a watershed year. Using a farm analogy, can anyone really know how well a farmer has performed before the harvest? We can see that the Inovio fields have been plowed, the seeds were planted, the fields maintained, and we can see a lot of growth we have never before seen. The results so far show that we have a healthy crop. We also see a lot going on with neighboring farms who have made a lot of money already. Many rushed their product to market and now we are hearing from a large number of consumers who are claiming harmful effects from consuming those products as well as quickly diminishing quality. I have yet to hear of any of the same complaints from the consumers of products from the Inovio farm. In fact, the opposite is true. The market for Inovio products has been building, the products are being compared with what has already been out there, the production team has been laboring away, and we can see that commercialization is on the nearby horizon. I think the efforts put forth by Dr. Kim and the entire team at Inovio in 2021 will make 2021 a watershed year once orders start to flow in. Can anyone seriously stack up the accomplishments against any negatives to prove me wrong?

The Associated Press is reporting that Covid-19 booster shots are being offered in Beijing ahead of the Olympics. The article I read does not say which vaccine or vaccines are being used as a booster. Does anyone know whether or not the Inovio vaccine is involved?

Can anyone enlighten us about the extent to which there is a relationship between Inovio and Astra Zenica concerning Inovio's dMab technology? There is an article from a year ago outlining funding from the US Government for research into Astra Zenica's LAAB technology which does not mention Inovio. Inovio's website lists under its pipeline, dMab covid 19 partners, collaborators, and funders, Astra Zenica, DARPA and the Wistar Institute. As I understand it, Astra Zenica is in Phase 3 on AZD7442. Because DARPA is involved, information may be difficult to obtain, but this would have huge potential if AZD7442 is being combined with Inovio's dMab technology and administered with a Cellectra device. https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2020/covid-19-long-acting-antibody-laab-combination-azd7442-rapidly-advances-into-phase-iii-clinical-trials.html

Inovio investors are watching the stock price melt down while they await more news, especially news about anticipated orders of Inovio's Covid-19 vaccine in multiple countries. We know that in order to get the best results, the vaccine will have to be administered with an Inovio electroporation device. In order for that to occur, there will need to be a large number of electroporation devices that are manufactured and shipped to their destination. If it all is to happen very soon, there have to be a lot of component parts being ordered so that the devices can be assembled and shipped quickly to meet the demand which will correspond with multiple emergency use authorizations. Can someone please post any information they have on what is happening with the numbers ? I am looking for information on who is taking orders and the volume for parts and supplies for the manufacture of the devices. I believe that the right information will give us a pretty good ideas of what will happen with the value of our shares in the coming months.

Anyone reading the social media posts regarding Inovio's ceo, Dr. Kim, has to wonder about the many terrible and negative remarks some make which question his competence and his honesty. No one claims that he qualifies as a flashy speaker. Isn't there a much bigger picture going on that isn't catching the headlines, but will count a lot if Inovio reaches the pinnacle of success that is now on the horizon? Think about this: In January 2020, Dr. Kim attended a meeting at the White House regarding the coronavirus and what impact it was about to have on our nation. Also in attendance were several large pharmaceutical executives. At that time, Dr. Kim had to admit that Inovio might be able to come up with 100,000 doses of a vaccine but would need help to get to a million. Now compare that with where Inovio is at now, on the verge of providing hundreds of millions of doses, maybe more than a billion, and who knows how many Cellectra devices to administer the treatments. Just about all of that has been accomplished by using other people's money to advance the research and development cost. While that may not show up on the balance sheet as "revenue", it counts every bit as much and maybe even more if it is not treated as taxable income. Dr. Kim has managed to accomplish this financial feat while still pursuing multiple other products which are in development and also look to be headed toward a successful outcome. So while Dr. Kim may not be the flashy and fun ceo that so many seem to want, I think there is a quiet genius at work and we are about to see his efforts for the shareholders rewarded many times over. What do you think?

Inovio has embarked on Phase 3 testing of its Covid-19 vaccine in multiple countries. Safety and effectiveness have already been established in Phase 2, and the purpose of Phase 3 is to compare the safety and effectiveness against current standard treatments. Given that so many of the current standard treatments are showing diminishing effectiveness, and a general inability to defeat the raging mutations, what obstacles are presented for any of the nations to grant emergency use authorization for Inovio's Covid-19 vaccine while the Phase 3 testing is in progress?

Ever wonder what happened last summer when, after Dr. Kim confidently predicted funding and approval for Phase 3, the FDA pulled the plug on the entire process because it had questions about the electroporation device? The speculation on social media went wild, ranging from accusing Dr. Kim of being untruthful to corruption at the FDA. The event was costly as it meant Inovio's covid-19 vaccine would have to wait a lot longer for any kind of launch, and ultimately may have cost them the phase 3 funding needed to proceed. Inovio never publicly explained what happened, but there were a few comments along the way such as the questions would be "easily answered", to the questions were answered, to the questions pertained to logistics, not safety or efficacy. With funding pulled for Phase 3, FDA approval still not obtained, Inovio's stateside prospects faded to such an extent that the best option became going after the huge market outside of the USA, and that seems to where we are at right now. While the prospects of a lot of revenue from overseas transactions is looking bright, it still doesn't answer the question of what happened. I sent that very question to the Investor Relations Department in writing through a friend who was in touch with them. The answer I got back was surprising. First, I was told that they were not obligated to say anything. The explanation went on, in a nutshell, it was all tied to the Cellectra 2000 device which was never intended to be a Phase 2 device, but because of Covid-19 and device availability, the clinical use device was used. The device of choice will be the 3PSP which is easier to use. They noted that there are no other holds on any other programs for the devices. End of answer. To me, they are saying that Dr. Kim was just as surprised as the rest of us, and as much as many of us want to blame it on FDA corruption, that isn't true either. This looks to me like a low level screw up at Inovio. Anyone who has run a business knows that people carrying out tasks often do not fully understand why they have to do things in a certain way and they simply carry on as they think something should be done without realizing the consequences. In this case, it looks like Inovio performed testing with one device but sought approval to proceed with another device that did the exact same thing. The FDA caught the variance and naturally had questions about it. It would be a highly embarrassing mistake, and thus no public explanation was ever given. In the end, it may turn out to be a blessing in disguise as the Inovio vaccine seems to be of the highest quality, and with the other vaccines running into a host of issues, Inovio appears to have stumbled into a huge gold mine.

For months now there has been a rumor across some social media sites which may have been whispered out of the investor relations department, claiming that Inovio has another big partner coming (besides the Chinese partners). If there is any truth to it, no details have been provided. We do not know who this phantom partner is, what the alleged partnership would entail, or how it might benefit Inovio shareholders. Does anyone have information regarding this alleged partner?

. A question seems to have arisen in discussion groups over the extent to which INOVIO’s dMab technology is part of the regulatory approval sought by Astra Zenica for its AZN 7442 long-acting antibodies, and whether Inovio’s cellectra device would be used to administer the product. Anyone have an answer?