In short: Cited as evidence, not a stance: its science breakthrough "a few weeks ago" on drugs tailored to the individual was "really well rewarded". It is his example of healthcare catching the second- and third-order AI effects after pharma sat "ice cold".
15:54Big pharma has generally been on. Now, that was a group that was ice cold. There is this concept, I think, that, this has nothing to do with really an income play, but the Moderna breakthrough on the science a few weeks ago, where we can maybe tailor drugs specifically for you as opposed to here's a cancer drug for everyone.
In short: Raised by the host, and Polomny declines to opine on the name: "what did you think of the Moderna news? Did you catch that with the personalized treatment for melanoma, and I think Moderna's share price tripled on the news… do you see a big opportunity in biotech?" Polomny answers the sector question, not the stock — "Oh, absolutely… these things go through cycles… we're at the bottom of cycle probably in biotech" — and says his route is an ETF plus 13F work, explicitly because single-name biotech is outside his circle of competence. No view on Moderna itself.
59:38scarcity it's going to carry on for a long time, but I'm always sort of not wanting to put all my eggs into one basket. So, like yourself, I think, have been looking at biotech a little bit. What did you think of the Moderna news? Did you catch that with the personalized treatment for melanoma and I think Moderna's share price tripled on the news.
In short: A completed short, taken as a trade against a vertical squeeze rather than against the science. Moderna and Merck reported that their personalised mRNA cancer vaccine intismeran plus Keytruda reduced melanoma recurrence and spread, with the phase 3 stopped early at first interim analysis after positive results — "which resulted in a 175% surge in MRNA stock, which we shorted." The exit: "from the peak, that stock fell about 30%. We covered it… I think we made about a high single digit percentage because we covered the first half around break even." His written reason for shorting it down to 140 is on page 40 of the deck. The judgement underneath is that a phase-3 readout does not justify a 175% one-day re-rating in a small-cap squeeze tape.
Moderna and Merck reported genuinely good news: their personalised mRNA cancer vaccine, given alongside Merck's Keytruda, reduced the chance of melanoma coming back or spreading, and the trial was stopped early because the results were already convincing. The stock rose 175% in a day.
Singh shorted it — betting the price would fall — not because he disputes the science but because a 175% single-day move is a squeeze, not a valuation. A large part of that move comes from investors who were betting against the stock being forced to buy it back at any price, which produces a spike that unwinds once the forced buying finishes.
That is what happened: the shares fell about 30% from the peak. He describes the exit precisely — the first half was covered "around break even," the rest as it fell, for a high-single-digit percentage gain overall. A modest profit on a fast trade, and an illustration that the discipline is in the covering rather than the shorting.
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
In short: Two days after the phase-3 readout it is the week's distortion, not a call. Wapner: healthcare is having its best week since late June and is the top sector week to date — "I say grain of salt because if I tell you that Moderna is up 140% week to date and that Merck and Moderna had the kind of announcement that they did, it's master-the-obvious that that sector is going to have a great week." Harrington concedes the point ("Moderna and Merck skewed it this week") before arguing the sector strength is broader. Raskin uses it as demand evidence for the sequencing complex: "the demand you can just see from Moderna and the new technologies — personalized medicine is here and is coming." No committee position in the stock.
In short: The stock more than doubled. Annika Kim Constantino: this is the first-ever phase-3 trial of the personalized cancer vaccine Moderna developed with Merck, and analysts had called it "a really make-or-break moment" because the street has high expectations for the shot across different cancers. The mRNA-based shot in combination with Merck's Keytruda met the study's main goal of reducing the risk of melanoma returning or spreading versus Keytruda alone — "some analysts say this trial in melanoma reinforces that confidence and signals the shot could become a long-term growth driver." Still to come: the filing for approval and the full data. Simpson, a Merck holder: "I hope this is a validation of an entirely new way to tackle cancer… if you're a short seller of Moderna, today's not the best day for your book." No committee position in the name, but Wapner uses it as the archetype: "the willingness to walk on straight lines for a while in hopes of a big payoff like you're getting today — that's often how the biotech trade looks."
Moderna's stock more than doubled in a day. The reason is the first full-scale ("phase 3") trial result for a personalized cancer vaccine it developed with Merck — a shot custom-made to a patient's own tumour, using the same mRNA technology as its COVID vaccine.
Given alongside Merck's existing cancer drug Keytruda, the vaccine met the trial's main goal: melanoma patients were less likely to see the cancer return or spread than with Keytruda alone. Analysts had called this a make-or-break moment, because expectations for the technology across other cancers rest on it working here at all.
Two things still have to happen before this is revenue: the companies have to file for approval, and the full data has to be published. Nobody on the desk owns Moderna — the committee's exposure is through Merck — but the day is treated as validation of an entirely new approach to treating cancer, and as the classic biotech payoff after years of a flat stock chart.
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.