alive and kicking
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.
I didn't know shareholders had class. Aren't they all greedy little bast*rds?
As Tom Petty sings "The waiting is the hardest part"!
<Goatradamus......Quatrain #666>
Shouldn't that be <Goat-train #666>
jesse,
I assume GTCB is well aware of this. However, why don't you contact GTCB to provide that information about just to be sure they do know.
Harcourt Fenton??
<Otherwise, will your new name be with two Ds? { : * )>
Nothing wrong with double D's!!
<The way the stock is acting - some-oneS smells something positive!>
Hmm, maybe that was the Romulan Ale talking. It is high in sulfur, you know!!
Flo,
I like the way you talk!! Are you sure it isn't the Romulan Ale talking? Or was it the after effects of a phaser stun?
Lew,
I do like you as well. Now, don't get any ideas because I am not going to meet you somewhere :)
Perhaps you misunderstood me or I didn't make myself clear. I do agree and have grown more concerned about dilution. I don't want massive dilution, especially at these prices which is why I said I preferred 10 million.
I do think there will have to be another dilution, but don't think it will happen until after the partnership. In fact, I expect it could happen very soon after the partnership, especially if GTCB stock price goes over $1 and stays there long enough to keep listed on the NASDAQ. Unless GTCB gets a great partnership with $20 million or more up front money, which I don't think there is a prayer of happening. If GTCB does meet the NASDAQ listing requirements, I would be shocked if GTCB didn't issue more shares. I could live with 10 million shares at more than $1 a share as a means of limping along until we get some material news. What has bothered me about Cox and GTCB management more and more is how we haven't once heard about some measures, any measures, to cut some costs. Even a symbolic salary cut for the executives would be welcome.
Jesse
<no one will give two hoots about them diluting the stock by 10million, 100 million........Its not going to be "important">
That is true. However, I would prefer that we need to add only 10 million more shares before the big stock price rise.
Oldberkeley,
The King is dead. Long live the king!
I think you just beat your last cartoon. Thanks for making me laugh out loud!!!
gaotfondler,
If you are hoping for $0.65 in the next two years, you would be a fool to stay invested in GTCB.
oldberkeley,
You have made me laugh many times with your cartoons, but this latest one is the best yet!!
Thanks,
Vinny
I hope most of the sellers are gone. I think many people are waiting to see what kind of deal will be generated for rATIII in the USA.
<<I have asked the same question for over 2 years and no one ever wants to really answer. My best guess is that the Street doesn't think this company has any credibility.>>
We all know that the street is an accurate predictor of a company's value. I mean Bear Stearns was at $170/share last year.
<<Things which are possible remain so until they are impossible. >>
Thank you Yoda.
oldberkeley,
The goat was much better looking!!
I also like the past few days much better than the weeks before. The big problem is we need a hell of a lot more of days ike the past few.
Ah yes, vagueness is the key to being a good prophet, or was that key to a good profit!
A $3 price prediction! That is one smart goat!! Does the goat's belly reveal the date for that price?
Two out of those three taste pretty good if cooked properly. The drop in share price is just a decoy by GTCB managment to use our goats to lure unsuspecting carnivores to their doom. Bwaaaa!!!!
Dew & Cromagnon,
That is what I was thinking, or should I say hoping. The delay was to try and finish the partnership before deciding on whether to do a reverse split.
<<After the split the price will start heading toward the same level only now you have only half as many shares;;;; do a little research. >>
If you really believe that, you should sell all you have now. I know that the intial path is usually down after a reverse split. How far down GTCB goes will be a composite between whether the overall market atmosphere remains negative, gets worse or improves, what the partnership deal looks like interms of up front cash and whether the partnership funds new trials for different rATIII indications, such as in heart surgery as Cox keeps saying, and finally what the DIC results will be.
The delay could certainly mean a reverse split is coming, but there could be other reasons as well.
<<Being reminded about a reverse split is like being reminded about a root canal..............>>
You feel a lot better afterwards! If it does comes to a reverse split, lets hope the same is true for GTCB investors.
croumagnon,
<<GTCB is a screaming buy...>>
GTCB it has been a screaming buy for quite some time. I buy GTCB and then scream as it drops afterwards :)
A few corrections in my last paragraph.
<<In addition to all the other proteins that get expressed at the same time and the concern about prions.>>
Ah, the prion card emerges. GTCB has already shown they can prions and separate them away from the rATIII during their purification process, so you have struck out here. Do you know where and how prions emerge? Did you know GTCB's herd are certified prion free, and from prion free stock? Did you know that yeast have prions too? Go back and read carefully my previous post and then read some basic biology about protein folding and secretion and then come back. You are really annoying me with your wild and unsubstantiated jumps based on little or no information. Good night.
John,
You really don't wnat to look at things with an even hand. It is also clear you didn't take the time to read what I said or don;'t underastand what I said.
First, it didn't take GTCB 15 years to produce one protein in milk. It took 15 years or so for GTCB to build a portfolio or proprietary proteins, FOBs and biosimilars, get a protein approved in Europe, have the same protein about to be submitted for approval in the USA and secure multiple partners. All Glycofi did was do the basic initial step of modifying a yeast that can expresss proteins which appear to be glycolsyated similaryly to human cells. Please don't act as if they are at equivalent stages or that Glcofi is far more advanced, because it is way behind. When you suggest equivalence or even superiority, you only embarass yourself.
What the Glycfi sale means is that the developers were very happy to take the money, and sell the company and a bigshot in Merck decided it was a good purchase. You equate these events as proof this yeast is superior to GTCB's goats. Maybe the developers saw how long it would take to get a drug, any drug to FDA approval and they didn't want to work that long and hard so took the quick easy money. Executives make many mistakes and play things safe so you can't read very much into it other than one person thought it was money well spent. sucha deciosn.
<<vinny, I am guessing the disadvantage to using goats and mammary glands is that the genes are much more difficult to manipulate and more time consuming to arrive at a new protein expression.>>
Building the DNA constructs takes about the sames time, inserting them into cells takes about the same time, or a bit faster in yeast, but we are talking a few weeks. Yes, it will take longer to get a mature producing goat, but you could do tests in mice or rabbits while the goats are maturing. In any event, you are not going to be contiunously chanige the protein and then expect to get approval. You can make multiple versions in mice and tets then and quickly change to rabbit or goats. Beiosde for FOBs or biosimilars, you are ogign to want to get as close to the original molecular structure as possible. If you start tinkering you can get unwanted and unexpected surprises and will likely have to run the risk of doing long clinical trials.
<But it is ironic that you are now arguing that transgenic goats are a more natural way of expressing glycoproteins Vs genetically altered yeast.>
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying, and it is valid and logical. What is ironic about this? Do you know what ironic means? You are embarrassing yourself if you think that making yeast glycosylation similar to human glcyocsylation means the yeast produced protein is now fully equivalent to CHO cell culture or GTCB's goats. I am talking about reality as glcyoslyation is only one post-translational modification of proteins. I also told you about chaperones being needed to properly fold proteins, other proteolytic cleavage events which may be related to form a mature, functional protein. Did you know that misfolded proteins can generate an immune response so even if the yeast could make as much protein, significant misfolding could trigger unwanted reactions and lower specific activity.
<<In addition to all the other proteins that get expressed at the same time and the concern about prions.>>
Ah, the prion card emerges. GTCB has already shown they can prions and separate them away from the rATIII during their purification process, so you have struck out here. Do you know where and how prions emerge? Did you know GTCB's herd are certified prion free, and form prion free stock? Did you know that years have prions too? Go back and read carefully my previous post and then read some basic biology about protein folding and secretion and then come back. You are really annoying me with your wild and unsubstantiated jumps based on little or no information. Good night.
We have known about Glycofi for quite some time and you are far too kind towards them and optimistic about them as if they are ready to complete with GTCB. Don't just believe thier press releases. All they have done is to place the human glycosylation enzymes into yeast. While it is an very impressive accomplishment, as Jesse says, glycolyslation is only a part of the battle. There are a large number of protein chaperones in cells, which bind top and fold proteins in an orderly fashion. Many of these are associated with nascent proteins as they are being translated, which helps ensure that the proteins folds in a proper way so that they are stable and functional.
Glycosylation and chaperones also serve to allow the proteins to be moved along the secretory pathway, and for proper folding and even proteolytic cleavage, as part of the targeting mechanism to the appropriate intracellular compartment. Different glycosylations serve primarily to transit the proteins in a pathway from ER surface, to ER lumen, to inner and outer golgi to secretory vessicles, which could lead to its ultimate secretion into the extracellular media. Failure to properly execute any step could cause you to make a alot of worthless non-functional proteins that could still be properly gycoslyated. The advantage of mammary glands is they are designed as secretory machines.
Juhn,
Hmm, I see you like to avoid the topic and bring up unrelated issues like black holes. You implied that the GTCB business model should be questioned because
<<Can a process that is superior to GTC produce similar quantities of complex proteins in another manner in the future?
Has anyone speculated on other means that are being developed to produce large quantifies of these complex proteins?>>
Of course these issues have been discussed many, many times. I provided specific answers why this is not the big concern for GTCB now. You simply avoided responding. I used the term putative several times to drive home a point. You want us to worry about something that hasn't happened, but more importantly, won't destroy GTCB even if it happened.
The issue of glycolsylation is relevant because GTCB has provided evidence that it makes GTCB produced monoclonal antibodies that are superior with regard to ADCC as compared to htose made by cell culture. Now, do you want to address my rebuttal to your thesis? Do you want to speculate what the superior ADCC means? Or will you simply continue to pontificate in generalities that aren't relavant to GTCB now and that lack real substance.
John,
Actually, I gave a series of reasons why I think you are full of crap. I don't think this is a personal insult but rather a strongly opposing point of view. Now it would have been if I said you were an idiot, which I didn't then and am not saying now. Would you prefer that I say your arguments are full of crap and I question your motives and competence based on the arguments you post?
You raised a series of concerns about competitors that were not balanced by the negatives any putative competitors would have to encounter, many of which GTCB has already resolved by or is in the process of resolving. Such issues include;
1) the breadth of proteins that can be expressed by GTCB's platform, which one cannot assume any putative future competitor can match.
2) post-translational modifications such as glycosylation which favor GTCB in ADCC, which one cannot assume any putative future competitor can match.
3) the size of the market for proteins, which can easily accomodate multiple suppliers which could arise with putative future competitors.
4) proprietary proteins from GTCB.
5) the time frame and cost involved in the emeregence of putative future. If you are so worried about this last issue, you should be heavily shorting Google, Yahoo or Microsoft because competitors can rapidly emerge with minor cost to dominate search engines.
In short, you came down pretty negative on GTCB as a business model, in a large part based on the supposed emergence of some competitors. Yet you don't really understand the barriers and the inherent advantages of GTCB. Why don't you do a bit of reading and then come back? I find it annoying that you make grand pronouncements about the GTCB as a poor business model without the benefit of any reasonable background knowledge or even a hint at a balanced argument.
<<o the key linchpin to the thesis should be questioned.
Can a process that is superior to GTC produce similar quantities of complex proteins in another manner in the future?
Has anyone speculated on other means that are being developed to produce large quantifies of these complex proteins?>>
Personally, I think you are full of crap. Funny how you come up with a lot of negative reasons including other competitors and present yourself as being thorough and balanced. Yet you fail to consider how long it will take competitors to get to the point where GTCB is now, nor how much it would cost to develop that platform, nor consider that each putative new method wouldn't have the ability to produce same spectrum of proteins efficiently, nor consider which proteins GTCB already has in their bag for which others wouldn't or couldn't compete.
I think one area GTCB has screwed up a bit is in not getting even a token up front payment when making the deals you listed. How about $5 million or $10 million/deal up front to start up?
Don't forget about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Rajuramas,
<<I lost my shirt in Nuvello and now might loose my pants too.. >>
Well, let us all hope that your underwear stays on!!
Jesse,
Looks like you have revealed my true identity since I wrote <<Jesse,
I was a pretty funny joke. >>
Hopefully, I will soon stop being a joke and become a more serious sentence!
Jesse,
I was a pretty funny joke. Well, it made me laugh anyway. Nice work quantum.
Now I am starting to get pretty pissed off about Cox and GTCB management. Obviously, the financial state is what troubling GTCB. They talked as if a a partnership would materialize at the end of 2007 or early January but nothing happened. I understand that negotiation can be tough, but they put themselves on the line by making the announcement and it didn't come through. GTCB did raise a small amout of money, but clearly that will be insufficient. They are now talking about a partnership in weeks, which really puts management credibility on the line, and if it fails, Cox should be fired.
I also don't understand GTCB didn't mention any cost cutting moves at the time they raised the small amuont of money from the recent placement. They need to cut cash burn, or raise revenues or really both. Even if they do get the partnership, they need to be thinking about cost cutting until more data comes in for acquired rATIII deficiencies, unless the partnership brings in enough cash to run GTCB for at a least another full year.
I sold 10% of my share yesterday at $0.57, which is the amount and price I bought it last week. I decided I had more than enough invested in GTCB and I got hosed on another stock, PGNX, so needed to get some cash. The sad part is PGNX is waiting for and will likely get approval at the end of April for their first drug, MNTX, for treating opiate induced constipation (OIC) in terminal cancer patients with advanced medical illness (AMI).
What is amazing, or maybe not, is how much misinformation that approaches lies, which has been issued about the phase III failure of MNTX for bowel disfunction following surgery. It is a completely different indication, triggered by different biological response from surgical trauma than that from long term opiate usage in AMI patients. The efficacy data from the AMI trials was stellar (p= <0.0001), yet the press releases from imbecile analysts are saying the bowel surgery trials efficacy failure casts doubt of the efficacy of MNTX in AMI patients. What a load of sh*t from uniformed morons. In an event, I wanted to have more cash on hand so I could buy more PGNX by late march or early April. PGNX has more than $6 a share of cash on hand their partner Wyeth is paying for all the developmental costs releated to MNTX. The only question left for MNTX in AMI is whether the safety data for 3 months will be sufficient for its approval in terminally sick cancer patients, even though no safety issues have yet been associated with its usage.
In addition, the potential market for treatment of surgical patients is small part of the potential MNTX market, with chronic pain sufferers who use opiates being the far larger market. The opiate usage market which was unaffected by yesterdays news. The whole economic situation has made people really jumpy to the verge of irrationality. The market can be really insane sometimes, but also provide opportunities.
Sorry. I thought you were speaking about rATIII.
What the hell are you talking about.