Vaxart Inc (VXRT)

$VXRT WTF is going on... Posts about safety only... went and checked... nope... still safety and efficacy everywhere you look... Used to be primarily efficacy... now it's primarily safety... nope... nope... it's always been primarily safety... with some efficacy... James told us that the results were exellent... now he's toned it way back... nope... James stated could be overlapping, could be a homerun, I don't know... with no real enthusiasm... What's Ed doing at the fireside chat... must be something real important that he's hiding... well... he was at the last fireside chat too... and he was answering questions regarding the contracts with BARDA and DVAX... just like an attorney should... Seems like someone is trying to change the narrative... sow some investor frustration seeds... I always question the motive in these situations... and believe me... there is one... but you can figure it out for yourselves... or keep agreeing with misinfo... Good luck longs... just being honest...

$VXRT DYOR and MYODs. What‘s so sad and infuriating about this situation is shareholders would have been fine giving them all the shares in the Equity comp pool etc etc at $50 mil market cap. Why wouldn’t they want that? Then you go borrow $100 million to start with a 5 -7 year balloon payment secured by intellectual property to buy back shares. Think about it you tell Sanofi lend us $100 million and we’ll give you the option to take 10-20% of shares we buyback in lieu of balloon payment? Sanofi gets foot in door to be Vaxart‘s global commercialization partner. All the shares mgmt got at $50 mil MC would be worth 20X at just $1 Billion MC. Shorts are screwed. You going to sell us half our OS under a $1? Insider Ownership and share buybacks would have accomplished same as RS. They could have already been FN filthy rich and 100% focused on business. Stay strong and vigilant. DYOR and MYODs. GLTA!!

$VXRT seems to me there’s a good chance our corrupt management is under wide scrutiny by Barda. If true it’s refreshing! All this fear over a reverse split on top of several failed RS votes, convicted BOD members, disgraceful no confidence votes by shareholders how did these idiots even get a Barda grant? If I was on the decision committee doing government due diligence on this company the management would at least get a stern “no shenanigans” lecture. Maybe Barda has finally taken a closer look at us. Maybe the shakeout/ take under we were about to get was headed off by Barda? My theory now is that no way does this management stick us and this administration doesn’t get a black and blue eye from it. “Management defrauds investors in promising new vaccine platform.” Or “Promising New Oral vaccine company battered by lack of SEC oversight.” 😮 “Trump funds company plagued with BOD corruption.” Folks, these articles write themselves. Not sure Sanofi buys enough cover🤷

$VXRT james said vaxart is blinded barda is blinded and they a nod from barda to analyze the data by an independent statistician.. of so , what does the below mean ? can someone explain what this cld mean ? and if they havent even analyzed the data - how long wld that take ? And we are working closely with them. And I think what we saw was a relatively small change in the delivery and unblinding of this data. Really the unblinding, not the delivery.

$VXRT fire the ceo.

$VXRT Obviously, once the paper is accepted, we will keep you all updated as appropriate. - sean tucker has anyone evr remember any active comms or PR about their publishing ?

$VXRT U need to get some popcorn 🍿 while reading this! 🤣👍🍻

$VXRT Does Sanofi want the results in the wind, of the 400? Does Sanofi want it hush? Did Sanofi ask Berg to make Cummings retract from safety and efficacy to just safety? For if efficacy is revealed the price rises, yes? The problem(s) with that: Sanofi may pay higher price in future (if they want more shares) Lo won't get his short as investor will see a nice pop before June vote. What if there is no correspondence between Vaxart and BARDA whereby BARDA asked for the hold, then what? Berg, do you have paperwork from BARDA holding up the show? What if not? If its just Sanofi and not BARDA that I mentioned above, then it isn't a mutual agreement to hold back, right? it was Vaxarts decision, right? Then would the future show that you just shot yourself in the foot for Sanofi? Well it would be 2 feet, yours and Lo's right? A question is not an accusation a court of law

$VXRT The ownership structure from Sanofi website contradicts that from the tickergate.com website. Take a look at this https://www.sanofi.com/en/investors/sanofi-share-and-adrs/shares-structure-vote

$VXRT by years end I will take a 1 for 1 stock share exchange with Sanofi at $50 @Vaxylove @BGirl

$VXRT Wouldn’t they want a lower sp since they are buying back their own shares??? https://stocks.apple.com/ADrUts8sgQJWB1wzWY6ivPg

$VXRT How can you hire someone like Lo, who drove his previous company into bankruptcy? How??

$VXRT We need to chase Lo out of the company. He says no one would be interested in the shares as long as we’re OTC. What nonsense. He just wants to use that as an excuse for his laziness and inability to approach potential companies. He only wants the reverse split, nothing else. If the results are good, it doesn’t matter where you’re listed. If Lo thinks you can never reach $4 organically, then something fundamentally is wrong. If the results are good, reaching $10 will be easy. He simply has to go and can go back to working as a head waiter, where he was discovered.

$VXRT. It seems that the concept of Blinding in clinical trials has become a relevant point of discussion since last Thursday and Friday’s events so I want to bring up something I’ve been thinking about lately: In most double-blind trials, researchers can see things like: • Lab values • Clinical measurements (symptom scores, viral load, biomarkers, etc.) • Adverse events • Overall response rates In other words, they CAN see everything except to which group A or B, those results belong. As such, patters in the results can become apparent including: -One group’s biomarker improving faster -One group having more side effects etc. In other words, there is much that can be interpreted from blinded data. I think that key players in this saga are much more aware of progress in the trial than they are letting on.

$VXRT according to tickergate.com institutions own only 4.6% of Sanofi Stock while 95.54 % is owned by retail investors. So they are kinda like us. https://www.tickergate.com/stocks/sny/ownership

$VXRT we closed right ON our 50 DMA. It dipped below for a sec but held. Thinking Monday it'll break hard one way or the other. Get your powder ready🤘 Wen Kennedy Funding?

$VXRT Two Sentences. Thirty-One Words. What follows is entirely speculative. I'm not an insider. I have no non-public information. I'm just a shareholder reading publicly available documents, press releases, and management's own words — and asking questions about what I'm seeing. I could be completely wrong. But the paper trail raises questions that are worth asking. What if I told you that on March 13, 2026, Vaxart's General Counsel sat on a fireside chat and — in thirty-one carefully chosen words — told shareholders exactly what's happening? Not in a press release. Not in an SEC filing. On a shareholder fireside chat. Where a company's top lawyer — for reasons nobody has adequately explained — was actively fielding questions. Two sentences. That's all it took. And I think most people heard them without actually listening. The First Sentence ------------------------- "There were more issues to work through than we had thought." Read it again. Now read just the last five words. "Than we had thought." Vaxart had a plan. A timeline confident enough that their CMO stood before Oppenheimer investors on February 25th and said results were coming "shortly" with "very good results" anticipated. That's not a man guessing. That's a man operating on a timeline his entire organization believed was locked. Sixteen days later — that timeline was gone. Replaced by "early Q2." Replaced by "we are blinded." Replaced by a General Counsel doing the talking. This trial has been in motion since before January 2025. BARDA has been the funding partner from the start. The DSMB cleared safety over a year ago. The FDA reviewed it. BARDA approved advancement. Every regulatory checkpoint was known. Every process was mapped. The Q1 timeline wasn't aspirational — it was operational. What kind of "issues" appear out of thin air — sixteen days before delivery — on a process that's been stable for over a year? (1) Routine paperwork? Known months in advance. (2) Data quality? Cummings confirmed data is ready for unblinding. (3) Safety signals? The DSMB cleared safety fourteen months ago and has been silent since. And Berg didn't say "issue." He said "issues." Plural. Multiple new complications. Materializing simultaneously. In a sixteen-day window. What singular event introduces multiple unexpected complications at once into a stable process? Now consider the timing. Sanofi closed its acquisition of Dynavax on February 10th — taking direct ownership of Vaxart's exclusive platform license. No more intermediary. For the first time, a multi-billion company sat directly across the table from Vaxart. February 10th — integration closes. February 25th — Cummings still expects Q1. March 13th — Berg is explaining unexpected issues. (1) What happened between February 25th and March 13th? (2) What "issues" suddenly required working through? (3) Why did they coincide — within weeks — with Sanofi stepping into direct ownership of the relationship? Maybe it's coincidence. But if the issues were mundane — why was the General Counsel the one explaining them? The Second Sentence ------------------------------ "Both BARDA and Vaxart must come to a mutual agreement on the timing for release." Fourteen words. Every one doing heavy lifting. "Both." Not one party waiting on another. Not BARDA slow-walking Vaxart. Both. Jointly. Together. "Mutual agreement." This should stop you cold. Neither party can act alone. Vaxart cannot release without BARDA. But here's what most miss — BARDA cannot force release without Vaxart either. They are jointly holding the blind. By choice. Does that sound like a bureaucratic delay? Or does that sound like two parties coordinating the precise moment information enters the public domain? "On the timing." Not on data quality. Not on methodology. Not on safety. On when. The what is settled. The how is settled. The only negotiation is the when. If the data is ready — and everyone confirms it is — what is there to negotiate about a calendar date? (1) Unless the date matters. (2) Unless the data can't land on just any day. (3) Unless it needs to arrive at a specific moment — synchronized with something else that has its own timeline. "For release." The endpoint is the moment information becomes public. The moment the market sees it. (1) Why would two parties need to mutually agree on the exact moment clinical trial data becomes public? (2) In what scenario does the date of a data release require negotiation? I keep arriving at the same place. The only reason timing requires mutual agreement is if premature release would disrupt something both parties have an interest in protecting. What are they protecting? Listen to what Berg didn't say. ----------------------------------------- (1) He didn't say the data had problems. (2) He didn't say analysis was incomplete. (3) He didn't say BARDA flagged safety concerns. (4) He didn't mention technical complications or staffing delays. He said unexpected issues arose. And timing requires mutual agreement. He explained the what without explaining the why. With the surgical precision of a lawyer who knows that when the full picture emerges, every word from March 13th will be examined under a microscope. Berg gave answers that are completely truthful. Completely defensible. And completely opaque. That's not evasion. That's a lawyer being excellent at his job under constraints he can't disclose. Place both sentences side by side: ---------------------------------------------- Something we didn't expect introduced new complications. And now the timing of the data release requires mutual agreement between both parties. Strip away the legal language. What's left? --------------------------------------------------------- (1) External events have taken control of the disclosure timeline. (2) Events Berg can't name. (3) Complications he can't describe. (4) A coordinated calendar he can't explain. Delivered by a General Counsel who shouldn't have been on a fireside chat — unless the stakes were high enough that nobody else could hold the microphone. In what scenario does a General Counsel — on a shareholder fireside chat: (1) Explain that unexpected issues delayed data. (2) That two parties must mutually agree on timing, (3) That disclosure triggers the moment the blind breaks — while carefully saying nothing about why? What is Berg protecting? What is the "mutual agreement" coordinating? What arrives in early Q2 that needed eighteen extra days — and a completely reframed narrative — to prepare for? Berg gave us thirty-one words. He told us everything. He just can't tell us the last part yet. But since Berg can't tell us — I'll take a shot at it. Stay tuned. NFA. DYOR.

$VXRT it appears Lo was put in place because he takes orders and is happy being a fall guy. We need a real leader. BARDA/Government has all our team by the balls.

$VXRT Science is golden... nothing has changed! Turn off your computers and come back in a month.

$VXRT don’t really know how to feel about all this Suppose I should be used to this shit by now.

$VXRT $30 to $55 a share By the end of the year to early 2027 FOLKS Why the 5,000‑Person Data Is So Much More Powerful The 400‑person cohort tells the market: “The platform works.” The 5,000‑person comparator trial tells the world: “The platform scales, beats injected vaccines, and is ready for procurement.” That’s the difference between a $1B company and a $5B–$8B company. 🔥 Clean Summary If the full 5,000‑person comparator trial data is fantastic, the realistic best‑case share price reaction is: Timeframe Expected Price Day 0–3 $15–$25 Day 4–14 $20–$35 2–8 Weeks $30–$55+

$VXRT So What Happens If the Data Exceeds Expectations? Below is the clean, disciplined, 30‑day price ladder for the exact scenario you asked about. Day 0 (April 15) $6–$10 Immediate repricing + BARDA credibility premium. Day 1–3 $10–$15 Short squeeze + institutional rotation. Day 4–7 $12–$18 Analyst upgrades + government commentary + platform narrative. Day 8–30 (Through May 15) $18–$35+ Acquisition interest + procurement modeling + platform valuation. This is the Best‑in‑Class + BARDA Amplification branch — the highest‑value branch in the entire VX‑31 scenario tree. 🔥 So Yes — Under These Conditions, $18–$35 Is Realistic But only if ALL of the following are true: BARDA is co‑releasing the data The data exceeds expectations IgA is strong, durable, and consistent Safety is pristine Cross‑variant protection is present The market sees platform‑level validation If those conditions are met, the $18–$35 range by May 15th is not fantasy — it’s the logical upper‑branch outcome.