Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Thanks. Sounds about right.
Who do you think would make the most sense for a '534 partner? As you mentioned BMY and Novartis, IMO, are out (Pfizer too, because they have Bosutinib in P3). It would make no sense for Ariad to partner with a company in which '534 would compete against the partners own internal drug (regardless of what '534 can do).
My bets are on Merck, or Celgene. Merck, because they have no CML or AML (from what I am aware of) drug and are still low on the oncology totem pole in big pharma. Celegene because they have a lot of experience with blood cancers and I think '534 would fit very nicely into their portfolio.
Thanks. Please let me know if you see this (and for some reason, I don't).
EXEL
Because the poison pill was pathetic in the first place.
Maybe these guys have finally realized the poison pill was putting a discounted valuation on the stock for YEARS due to it's negative effect on a "takeover premium".
Maybe Harv' has finally realized it's going to cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build out his dream of a "fully integrated oncology company" and it might be (at his age...and possible health problem(?) (that's my speculation based on his non-appearance and Ed Fitzgerald's statement at the AM) easier and more rewarding to sell the company at $20/share in the future.
Why bother with a poison pill. Shareholders can decline a takeover if the number sucks.
XL management are among the biggest snakeoil artists in the business. At least their former CEO was, IMO. I suspect his protege will be the same. Even with the amount of compounds these guys have, the entire Street seems to be discounting this company bigtime - to the point of saying their compounds are going nowhere - why? I don't know...it's what I am trying to figure out.
Don't expect XL management to buy a SINGLE share of stock with their own personal money, from their own personal bank accounts. After being in and out of this company a couple of times, it's quite apparent the only stock they own are $0 priced options on the shareholder dime.
Does anyone have a handle on XL184 and Exelixis?
If one would take a gander at the chart, one might think this company is kaput. They just engaged in 2 major debt financings, and, a company with no revenues and a company that is "all in" on XL184, their lead compound, doesn't make for a rosy picture.
I am watching it get cheaper and cheaper daily. Can't really get a handle on if its just their 68% institutional ownership dumping positions when there are just simply no buyers because there is no news, or it's something that is seriously wrong with their lead compounds. They have a ton of "me too" drugs which aren't anything special....but, they have a lot of compounds and I would be surprised if at some point someone didn't take a hard look at purchasing them (unless all their partnerships make it nearly impossible).
XL184 is just yet another MET, VEGF2 kinase inhibitor showing nothing special.
Any thoughts on this?
::No position
not that it would be a major event, but they should likely get a "fast track" status on '534.
They already have the orphan designation. I would think "fast track" would be coming, too. Fast-track is kind of a sham, in my opinion. FDA moves at snails-pace regardless of what "track" they are on.
For Don__Shimoda (I don't need pumpers answering this)
What are your thoughts on '534 partnership. EX-US only? Do they partner for all indications (solid tumors as well)? Do they partner before or during '534 pivotal? What do you think a '534 partner is worth (upfront)?
I have seen some companies (Exelexis and Incyte come to mind) that have received $150 million upfront for some of their compounds. In the case of Exelexis, they received quite a bit of money for a really garbage compound (MET, VEGF2), and received a huge amount for their PI3K compound (justanother-me-too compound). Having said that, I would be very disappointed if Ariad got less than $100 million upfront----but then again, what is the actual "market" for '534 (what's the market, if any, in solid tumors? What's the market if you are only getting 2nd and 3rd line, and T315i indications)? I firmly believe Exelexis' management are the best snakeoil salesmen in the business and they got way more than they deserved - but it shows you need a good salesperson at the helm.
Bought more.
I don't know why but this pig seems to be holding up in the down markets while other sm cap bios are getting hammered (ex. EXEL, a miserable chart. I don't think they're going to make it).
I see accumulation in Ariad right now. Daily.
I agree.
It's one more thing that is wrong with the FDA and corporate lobbying in America. Big Pharma gets their CRAP passed through in no time, only to find out years later after billions were spent greasing politicians and doctors, that the drug is garbage and either is no better than older drugs, or actually is more harmful.
Meanwhile, small bios can't get diddly done without having to partner with big pharma so THEY can grease the politicians. If you don't have big pharma on your side, you're running up a wall with roller skates on. Either that, or you get put through the ringer like Dendreon did....when their drug clearly showed survival efficacy, but they didn't grease the FDA so they had to wait around for another year for appproval.
FDA are corrupt maggots.
But, that's besides the point. The main point here is Avastin shouldn't be pulling in the money it pulls in...it's a crude drug that is slightly higher on the food chain than the crudest chemo therapies.
I truly hope Roche finally gets what's been coming to them a long time....
Which is that the FDA will finally wake up and realize that Avastin is pure garbage and Roche essentially has been paying off people in a big way to keep this drug going.
Avastin is trash and if you look at the survival curves, it's pretty obvious this drug is only slightly better than 50 year old chemo therapies.
Avastin, IMO, isn't a great therapy. I'm really glad the FDA is finally waking up and has stopped granting Avastin a free-for-all.
The side-effects are nasty.
In the not-so-distant future, I think Avastin is going to be looked at as people once looked at chemotherapy.
((GULP))
No position here, long or short.
I HATE non-oncology bios. HATE them for this reason... Too much hoo ha on safety issues...and some rightfully so.
Is it from the same research firm that was saying Provenge would not be approved? (I cannot gather the name of the analyst - firm that said it)
***"anonymous" science paper... that's incredible. Who would even buy something like that. For all anyone knows, its from some SeekingAlpha author, or a short position holder who is taking it in the can.
you mean the article that was out YESTERDAY morning?
the cytostatic nature of many new therapies (e.g. antiangiogenic agents and mTOR inhibitors) may cause early effects in tumours that may not involve changes in tumour size and may consequently be missed by anatomical measurements [18]. Furthermore, a responding sarcoma may initially increase in physical size as a result of intratumoural haemorrhage or myxoid degeneration
Personally, I don't think it's VVUS related.
Other oncology small cap stocks are taking a hit today.
VVUS and the other obesity/ diabetes cos are climbing, yes. But, ARIA is as far away from area as ever...
This is Ariad specific. Hoping for substantially relevant news, but, ...could also be a large short position exiting. I dont know.
I'm hoping this is news driven, and not technically driven (we plowed through the 200 DMA nicely), with volume.
But, I would take technically driven AND news driven together.
That's what I am thinking.
It would be very very positive if these results are good, and would relieve some of my fears about this compound as single agent.
I have been going thru trial sites and some other sources to see what might be going on and cannot find anything. Will check further into FDA.gov but I cannot find anything. JPM put out a note a couple of days ago but it's not relevant.
Friday upgrade?
Doubtful.
Either (a) a research note went out which I am not aware of, or (b) news is coming soon.
They have two endometrial cancer trials, of which one of them is sponsored by NCIC which final analysis is due this month (could be the news)? If positive, it would relive a LOT of my concerns about single-agent Rida
ARIA
High volume and good action in a bad market.
Volume is strangely higher as if there is some news not yet announced
Very good action, very good volume.
Something is going on.
On the other hand, everolimus is in a tablet form, using the dose and schedule that they put forth which is a daily dose of 10mg a day, and so there the differentiation with ARIAD’s product we are developing with Merck, namely deforolimus, is that our dose and schedule could not be more different. In fact, I would say the everolimus versus deforolimus difference in dosing schedule is as great as the difference between oral and IV.
they are not therapeutically equivalent
You are correct.
My bad on my math. What's a comma or an extra zero here or there....
If Harvey says a particu;ar buyout is a bad deal
OK, thanks.
Honestly, I think Ariad is the only company I own that has a Board composition such as this.
It's a shame.
Even with a staggered Board, couldn't a majority shareholder vote be enough for even a hostile bid to allow for a takeover?
Does the Board really have the ultimate say in a yes or no situation, even if, say, 75% of shareholders approve of a hostile bid? I am asking this because I haven't read the By-Laws of the Company (I don't know if I really need to, in order to have that question answered). It's more of a question for an attorney or investment banker.
I was intrigued by all the changes in employement agreement with respect to % ownership etc., in the wording and change in control etc. I don't think Berger did this because he "knows" there is a change in control coming. I honestly believe he took a look at the Fidelity position of 14.98% (that's a really big position and at the time was .002% away from triggering a poison pill), and got scared that with the Fidelity position and other institutions now owning 50% of the company, he could be either tossed out (if he once again becomes a ineffective and greedy CEO) or the company is vulnerable to a takeover.
With ~50% institutional ownership, Harvey will have no choice whatsoever. I believe Berger put all those new take-over clauses in his employement agreement as well as others because he knows institutions would have full vote / control with the institutional ownership where it is. It's a lot more important (control) with big institutional sponsorship at 50% than it was at 20% (when no one cared about ARIAD)
Shareholders, I can almost guarantee you would vote in favor of a $15 bid, even if it is hostile. Poison pill won't matter one bit because shareholders would vote FOR the price. (assuming a poison pill even exists)
100 what?
If you're referring to $100.00 per share in either a buyout or a price that ARIA will ever have, you really should do some rigor analysis or run some more respectable numbers. 100.00 price target sounds more like an unsubstantiated pump.
1. ARIA fully diluted at $100 would be worth $130 billion. Can you please name one biotech with 3 compounds (I am giving Ariad the benefit of the doubt that they will have all three approved) that is valued that high (also take into consideration Ariad doesn't have 3 novel compounds - in fact, all their compounds are drugs which are "me too" drugs: '534, Gleevec/Tasigna/Sprycel and a few other TKIs that target the same area (yeah, Ariad's targets T315i: how many patients actually have that mutuation? A few thousand?; mTOR: Afinitor/Toricel and several other mTOR1 and mTOR2 drugs in clinic; '113: Pfizer's crinotinib. Point: Ariad isn't Dendreon or HumanGenome of which both of these companies have breakthrough medications which no one else has.
2. What are your revenue estimates for Ridaforolimus and '534 and '113 by 2017? JPMorgan and Oppenheimer only have revenue estimates in the few hundred millions. Are you saying they're wrong, and if not, why should Ariad be valued 150x revenue?
3. Are you referring to ARIA $100/share after a large reverse split?
Thanks.
FWIW, I am much more confident in ARIA now than in the past (meaning last year at this time).
They really need to get a '534 partnership and mucho cash BEFORE the SUCCEED trial results, however. They just have to get this done. It would entirely mitigate any negative result of the trial.
One thing I am really on the lookout for is the endometrial results from the NCIC. Final data collection for endometrial results sponsored by Canada, say July 2010. I do not know when Merck will have results for their own internal, blinded study. If the blinded, randomized study meets its goal, then I think Rida will have hit a home run. If it's negative, I would be extremelyyyyyy cautious on the SUCCEED results. Either way, I fully expect endometrial results to be out before SUCCEED final analysis.
Personally, I'd like to see ARIA taken over. And it's not going to be taken-over for $65/share....I'd be thrilled with $15
it's my general sense that whenever i see a stock offered lower before the open (with no news) while the broader market is flat or up, that it's usually someone unloading a position.
the markets don't trade like they used to. If an algo says its sell time, regardless of the liquidity and what's going on, ...it's sell time.
so, basically, you have
(1) Bone sarcoma: and several different subsets of that bone sarcoma; and,
(2) Soft-tissue sarcoma: which consists of several different subsets of soft-tissue sarcoma.
Would you mind telling us how many different types of sarcoma that would consist of? HINT: It's not one or two, or even three or four.
ummm.....and bone sarcoma.
I just think Ridaforolimus, if combined with another drug, would likely have been a "shoe-in" for success in the Phase 3 trial.
I am not so cheery on the outcome as a standalone drug in sarcoma. I think there is a lot of risk in the SUCCEED trial, namely the placebo group washing out the overall results.
Sarcoma is a very very broad term. There are many different types of sarcoma. This trial is an "all comers" trial in that all types of sarcoma are being thrown into the trial, and I believe Rida will work very well in some of these patients, but will show very little evidence of success in some types of sarcoma. Let's just put it this way...if the drug was a "shoe in", the 2nd interim would have stopped the trial.
Yeah, investigators call lots of things "best in class"...I'm not impressed.
mTOR as a class will be best served using biomarkers and combinations.
And of course I'll be called a basher for saying all this, so...whatever.....
my personal opinion if i were a buyer would be to
"average up".
Personally, I think "averaging down" is and always has been (for us anyway) a very poor trading strategy.
Take 2008, for example. A LOT of brokers were telling people to "average down" when the market (Dow) was at 11,000. Average down again at 10,000...market always goes up. Average down at 9,000, it will come back. Buy some more here at 8,000, it should be moving higher soon. Oh GOD. Sell at 7,000, market's going to 3,000.
Get my point? I am not happy with "value" investing because I want to see momentum in a company...a reason to buy. For those who have been long enough in ARIA, I'm SURE there were people in ARIA saying it was a value at $20, then at $10 etc etc etc.
Personally, I think this company is MUCH MUCH better off today, than it was last year at this time. They got the Merck deal done. Risk is off (somewhat) with the Rida development program in that it's not costing ARIA any money. Only risk is SUCCEED trial fails (which I am nervous about - I don't think the drug is great, and the trial has a severe risk of the placebo-effect of placebo arm living longer (which seems to be a common occurance these days with P3 trials in onco stocks). '534 is a "put" on the company. Essentially, if Rida fails, you are protected with '534 (the most promise of the company for future stock movement). The only reason I am still confident in ARIA is '534. I have 50/50 confidence in Rida. I have 80% confidence in '534. The ALK '113 I am not placing any value in right now because it hasn't even dosed anything outside of a petri dish (albeit, promising). '113 should add value ONCE the SUCCEED trial succeeds (if it does).
My opinion: if SUCCEED fails. Stock meanders along between 2-3-4 dollars, maybe pops to 6 on a '534 partnership, and then drifts nowhere until '534 results are complete.
My opinion: if SUCCEED trial succeeds. We won't be looking at single digits anymore because the company will finally be "forward looking" at their pipeline and not focused on near-term success or failure of Rida. Again....right now, all bets are on what Rida is doing. I think there might be a run going into the Rida final analysis (when they announce a timeline as to definitely when that will be). Do you hold going into the result? I will re-evaluate.
Until news... this stock is going to flux with the market. There's really no excitement...as with most biotechs these days (summer)
it's going to take a "news event" to get this company moving again. Until then, it's going to keep trading with the over-all market....
It's technically driven B.S. thats swinging this stock.
Real no reason to get in right now so the stock is trading on someone's algo program (or multiple algo programs). You can be assured that when it breaks 2.92-2.95 and closes high on those levels (200 DMA) that algos will kick into accumulation/buy mode.
Yes, those are a direct quote from Harvey Berger in an earnings Q release.
Any way you cut it: he was giving the impression to shareholders there was a strong probability of this happening (heck, theres a probability that the drug wouldnt work at all----why didn't he say that???). He didn't say it WOULD happen...but it was inferred...OR HE WOULD HAVE NEVER SAID IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Either way, I believe many investors were taking the bet (on his words) that the 2nd interim would lead to an NDA. Those investors gambled, and lost. I believe, along with the overall market, this is why ARIA has been deflated 25% or more since the announcement that the trial would proceed to the end.
From my point of view, if I go by Dr. Berger's words, to me, it says his calculations on the efficacy of Ridaforolimus in the SUCCEED trial are "off", and it calls into question the overall success of the trial IMO. Clearly, he was counting on the drug being powerful enough to show a statistical significance at the interim - it didn't. Why? It's possible the drug isn't showing strong efficacy, or it's possible the placebo group is progressing longer. Or, the DMC just didn't want to end the trial because the arms are too close right now at the interim.
Either way you cut it, the trial is continuing because the drug didn't meet the criteria to stop the trial - which, is a negative IMO - --but isn't a disaster...the trial still continues.
Wallstarb, you are correct.
In the case we are speaking about, Ariad...
If I own 1,000,000 shares of ARIA at $2.00 and the stock has 110,000,000 shares issued and outstanding, I own just under one (1) percent of the company.
If ARIA has releases news and immediately issues 20,000,000 shares at $10, regardless of where the shares are issued (at this price: $10), ARIA now has 130,000,000 shares issued and outstanding....***and now my 1,000,000 shares (1% ownership) is **DILUTED** down to .0075% (ie., my ownership is now down to 3/4 of 1%). No way around it: my ownership in ARIA has been diluted.
I don't understand how someone cannot understand the basic principals of dilution and be invested in the market.
Dilutions suck any way you cut it (tell that to the CTIC bagholders). ARIA is a diluted mess now, too (the company issued something like 40 million shares since the Merck partnership at terrible valuations).
Dilutions to the public and private markets through PIPES are brutal.
Dilution as an investment from a large entity (ie., if Merck, in the example above, bought 20,000,000 shares at $10, would be fabulous - - because these types of investments aren't in the habit of dumping their shares----they're a buy and hold approach)----those types of dilutions are highly positive and a good sign.
All too often biotech companies participate in the former --the pump and dump, raise money on any pump. Meanwhile, the participants are generally well versed on when the deal is coming and have shorted into the deal.
Why do you keep making these kinds of statements?