McCall’s “World’s First $1 Million Stock” Teaser… Answered

What's being teased by NexGen Investor as the "Amazon of Biotech?"

By Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe, March 13, 2018

Matt McCall is pitching a “$200 into $1 million” stock idea as he tries to drum up subsribers for his NexGen Investor… and that sounds fun, right, owning a stock that goes to a million dollars per share?

It probably won’t happen, of course, and I don’t know how many times it might have actually happened in history — even the stocks that you’d think could be close to that level don’t generally have returns that remarkable, and most have split their shares a bunch of times in the interim to make them more palatable for new investors to consider (Amazon, for example, would be at roughly $15,000 per share right now if it weren’t for stock splits — a nice gain from the $18 IPO price, but even that’s not in the “$200 into $1 million” category… Amazon IPO investors who held on for 20+ years to today would have turned $200 into about $165,000).

But anyway, McCall’s “passion,” he says is to bring you the next great early-stage disruptor that could make investors rich… he uses the examples that make us all feel greedy, like Netflix, Amazon, Tesla, Apple and Facebook, and then leads into his spiel about this new stock:

“It features another early-stage profit opportunity that could be bigger than ALL of these past moneymakers….

“I realize this sounds hard to believe.

“But not when you realize this company possesses a game-changing DNA technology that’s about to turn the $3.3 trillion health care industry upside down.

“That’s not just me saying this.

“Bloomberg says this technology ‘will change the world.’

“Forbes calls it ‘the next step in human evolution.’

“Nobel Prize-winning scientist David Baltimore agrees that this DNA breakthrough will usher in ‘a new era in human history.'”

Those are references to the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing discoveries and advancements that we’ve seen over the past few years, though there’s seemingly been as much action in the patent courts as in the clinic. The Bloomberg reference is from this article about the patent fight between Feng Zhang and the other early CRISPR researchers Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier, the Forbes quote is likely from this article, and the quote from David Baltimore has been widely circulated in stories about gene editing, it’s from his opening remarks to the International Summit on Human Gene Editing in December 2015.

And there’s plenty more of this general boosterism for genetic editing:

“… this DNA technology allows researchers, on the cellular level, to ‘cut out’ the bad strands of DNA that are the root cause of hundreds of chronic diseases.

“I call it Genesis because it has the power to virtually rebuild every DNA from the beginning.”

As well as some references to specific “cures” or treatments that have caught peoples’ attention — like the story of Christian Guardino, who regained his sight thanks to gene therapy (using what is now called Luxturna, from Spark Therapeutics — which is certainly a gene therapy, and it was huge news when they got approval in December, though it’s not a therapy that relies on CRISPR-Cas9 editing technology).

So all of that, and most of the big picture stuff he cites in the ad, is about the promise of gene editing and genetic therapies in general… and mostly about the rapid speed of advancement in that field thanks to the precise tool that CRISPR-Cas9 editing gives researchers. We can agree on that basic “genetic editing is a big deal” premise, though I have no idea when it will become something that we can rationally analyze when it comes to economics… partly because much of this is still lab science that has barely begun human testing, and partly because the economics are completely untested and will shake up the pharmaceutical business — how much is a “one shot cure” worth? Who pays? There was an interesting Wired article on this following the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference a couple months ago, should you want to dig deeper.

But anyway, let’s move on to see what other specifics we get — OK? See if we can name this “secret” company that McCall says will be the “world’s first $1 million stock” for you?

First, w