vreach,

<Am I the only one that has enjoyed the many highs and lows that GTCB has shared over the last "few" years. >

Enjoy?? I didn't know you were a masochist. I have definitely experienced many feelings that have been elicited by my investment in GTCB. I can safely say that enjoyment hasn't been one of them. Hopefully, that one has been saved for the near future. You know what they say "He who laughs last, laughs best!"

Go seek,

I agree completely. All we have had with GTCB for quite some time has been hope, and as you so accurately point out, that doesn't and hasn't paid the bills. It has taken ever bigger dilutions. Yes, after FDA approval, we need clarity and FOB deals.

Dew,

I guess it depends on capacity. I think this thread has been beaten to death. Good Luck.

Madcity,

Yes, I agree that the major positive of the Teva-Lonza deal is that FOBs are becoming more of a reality. I think we could see many more players enter the game as companies, including big pharma, start to get worried about being left behind. I also agree that GTCB needs some kind of substantial FOB deal to make a major price jump.

I also understand Dew's point that the deal is a major expansion of production capability, from cells growth, to crude media containing the desired protein through high level purification. What I am arguing, and what Dew is missing, is that GTCB could provide the crude media (milk) containing the protein of interest. The expensive bottleneck is almost certainly the large sterile vasts needed to grow cells as well as the growth process itself. As long as Teva-Lonza has facilities to purify proteins, and such scale up can be done cheaply and quickly, then Teva could certainly be interested in utilizing those facilities. The point is that the most expensive and limited step is removed by GTCB. If Teva sees something that GTCB has to offer, and feel they can make a good profit, they will make a deal. The fact that Lonza already does work for GTCB gives them an insider's edge.

I like you Dew, but I do find it amusing that you provide precise estimates for FDA approval, 62% or 72%. I place this discussion about Teva along the same lines. I also find it amusing that Cox_rocks on the yahoo board is now a major basher when he used to be an uber long. I assume he sold off at a major loss when GTCB was under $0.20 and is now bitter that GTCB is near $0.70 with FDA approval pending. It reads like a jilted lover who can't stand to watch his former partner start to prosper without him, so launches attacks to demean the other.

Dew,

You aren't making sense. Yes, Teva is expanding their production capability and the Lonza deal does exactly that, so we agree. So now that Teva has grealty expanded production capability, don't you think they might want to expand the number of proteins they can acutlly purify? GTCB has several candidates right now to utilize those expanded protein facilities. I am not saying it will happen, just that it still can happen. Your view makes sense only if Teva has determined that the Lonza deal only gives them enough capacity to make what they have on hand now, and aren't interested in other proteins they currently do not make.

Dew, I am not sure why you are confused. Teva can make a number of proteins in cell culture on their own and have Lonza process them. Obviously this has nothing to do with GTCB. However, why would you think the Teva-Lonza deal would preclude Teva from expanding the number of proteins they can make by making a deal with GTCB for proteins they already making transgenically. Seems like a good way to speed up the process as well.

Dew,

I don't think you are correct. It shows that TEVA has growing interest in FOBs. Lonza provides productions but GTCB can provide supplies of new products to be produced.

<You can't persuade shareholders that they should invest money indefinitely in the absence of any light at the end of the tunnel.>

GTCB has been pretty good at persuading me to do that for quite some time :)

go seek,

<Vinny... you have a very interesting mind...>

You are not so bad yourself. Interesting is such a good adjective to ascribe to someone. It enables your post to mean anything from "you are quite impressed on how I can make prescient extrapapolations based on limited information" to "you must be a raving lunatic but I am amused by what you post". So, thanks, I think.

I was think about potential partners, and I think a big generic outfit might make a good fit. Teva certainly fits that bill.

Dew,

Both you and Jesse provided the likely scenerio for LEO to reconsider then back out and explain why Ovation apparently is choosing to base their immediate hopes for expanding the rATIII label to acquired deficiencies other than DIC. The difficult nature of getting the appropriate patients for the DIC trial makes it both time consuming and likely more expensive to conduct the trials. LEO is responsible for the entire cost of the phase II trials so they set the rATIII very high in the hopes of generating more revenues to offset high cost of the DIC trial. We know that strategy has been a failure. LEO isn't a large cash rich company so may have decided not to risk too much capital as it likely became apparent that the DIC trial required a deeper committment for training/informing/recruiting ICU doctors at a number of hospitals, longer time frame for the trial and therefore much higher costs than anticipated. That could obviously one reason why they decided to change direction. I can't guarantee it is correct, but I think it is more likely than what you are implying, that LEO and Cox/GTCB issued blatant lies about rATIII safety and efficacy dat fomr the rATIII trial to mislead shareholders and also used the transfer to LFB as another ruse to mislead.

In contast, CABG can be tested in far more controlled and timely fashion. Yes the rewards would ultimately be far greater for DIC, assuming rATIII was successful, but so is the expense and time committment. I assume we will also be hearing more about acquired deficiencies, such as for burns, in the near futre form both Ovation and LFB. I did think long and hard about selling some or all of GTCB last month, but decided against selling anything. The reason I didn't was that I shifted my view from the DIC trial being the key savior of GTCB, to the FOBs and other plasma proteins made by GTCB. They have become far more likely to play a role following FDA rATIII approval, combined with the election of Obama and Democrats more favorable to both science and health cost reductions.

Vinny

Madcity,

Yes it is exactly what Dew said. How could LEO know if there was a problem with the clincal data if they didn't know what patients had been treated with rATIII? If they know which patients had been treated, then they would also know there was a problem with efficacy and or safety. This means Cox and LEO must be lying when they said there were no issues in either case.

Corn is a classic example of such a genetic manipulation.

Bald-faced lies told with a bold face!

Dew,

<Moreover, I stand by the suggestion that a problem with the clinical data in DIC/sepsis induced Leo to walk away from the program halfway through the phase-2 trial.>

Are you saying the DIC trial is not blinded? If so, are you saying that Cox and LEO have issued bold-faced lies about rATIII and the DIC trials?

Jesse,

I agree completely

I grasp your point entirely. However, you don't seem to be able to grasp that it is completely irrelevant to my point that GTCB needs to issue timelines it absolutely knows it can meet or beat. This topic is closed.

n4807g,

Is your name johnbits? I made a point that GTCB management shouldn't issue timelines unless they are sure they can meet, or better yet, beat them. You keep harping on the your opinion that LFB might not have incentive to move quickly. Your point is irrelevant to mine and your continually repeating it won't change that fact. Let me try and get through to you one last time. If what you say is correct, and it might or might not be, then GTCB should have simply said "the transfer from LEO to LFB will be made as soon as possible" but nothing else. Can you understand the meaning of the words I am typing?

You can also consider that LFB is losing time, and therefore money, if they delay the transfer. FDA approval will likely lead to one or more deals involving FOBs so LFB would no longer have the hammer hanging over GTCB's head. If so, then footdragging for a delay could generate negative overtones for future dealings. It is a tricky game to play as if you wait too long, your advantage is lost since you can overplay your hand and generate some blowback.

n4807g,

I don't know what you are trying to say. It is irrelevant whether or not LFB wants a delay. I only stated that GTCB should state timelines that it knows it can meet or beat, rather that its usual issuing ones it continually misses.

Dew,

GTCB has certainly earned skepticism regarding their announcement and time-lines. GTCB announced they hoped to complete the transfer by the end of the year. That has come and gone. The should have said in the 1sy qurtyer of 2009 to give themselves some leeway, and allow for a pleasant surprise for shareholders if it occurred in 2008. Unfortunately, it appears that GTCB management still has their collective head up their butt by putting out a statement that is overly optimistic. Don't they have anyone in their management team that understands that you must only issue timelines that you can actually meet? A good management team knows this. I understand that unforseen circumstances arise, but this is par for the course for GTCB. Instead, what we now get is uncertainty and fear as people wonder about the transfer. It may well be that LFB is seeking to renegotiate the deal or it may be the usual management incompetence.

As for as other deals, I don't see any being made until after FDA approval. Such deals could be lined up but be contingent on said approval, or be in a more tentative stage with the real bargaining only set to occur after approval.

<Happy trading, too bad it took you so long to figure
out that sitting on your thumb wasn't profitable. >

Maybe he has a really impressive thumb.

Feeny,

I see you are pretty sensitive today. The stock price wasn't at $0.11 for very long and the way it dropped so quickly along with several long time longs abandoning GTCB made me very nervous. GTC stock price jumped up pretty quickly to the mid and upper teens but I didn't want to get sucked in if it dropped back to $0.11 so I hesitated in the hopes it drop back to give me another chance. It did not so I didn't buy.

Perhaps you don't understand the term hesititation, or that people might take some time to decide whether to buy more, expecially after being down a lot and being worried about FDA approval and GTCB cash position. GTCB dropped to $0.11 on Nov 25th and was only there the next day. GTCB priced in the mid teens for about a week and a half before going up to the upper teens in the next 2 weeks or so until it surged over $0.20 and didn't look back.

flo,

Thanks for the laugh. That cartoon is too close to the truth to make me feel comfortable.

feeney,

If you made the trades you claimed this morning, congratulations. The very simple point I was making is that if you want shout out how clever you are making some trades, you must post at the time you make the trade and at the price you traded, not after the fact. This would at the very least provide some verification for your claims.

I undertand it is human nature to only want to post the things that place you in a better light, but that hardly portrays an accurate picture. I always post when I buy and at the prcie I buy. Not because I think anyone really cares, but that there will be a cyberspace record of what I said. Talk after the fact is really cheap and very common. For example, I did mention on this boad that I was thinking about buying more GTCB when it dropped to $0.11. It would be very easy for me to claim that I did buy at the price now. The truth is that I hesitated and the opportunity was lost as GTCB's stock price rapidly surged.

Good Luck.

oldberkeley,

It isn't surprising at all. Everyone is an excellent trader when tell how great the trades they made were, but somehow they only tell you after the fact. It is either selective posting where they did actually make the great trade, but they only post about the trades that went well and conveniently omit the ones where they got killed. The other possibility is that they are legends in their own minds as these involve imaginary trades.

Oldberkeley,

Well said and as you might suspect, I agree with you completely. I knew there was more to like about you than your hilarious pictures.

Vinny

P.S. I am talking about the cartoons that you post, not your portrait. :)

Go seek,

I like the way you post!!

<what kind of deal you got in mind>

As Don Rickle's character in the movie "Kelly's Heroes" said. "A deal-deal"

The panel was voing on 2 drugs, one from GTCB and one from another company.

Dew,

The guy is confused aboiut something else as he thinks two drugs have been approved.

Dew,

I heard the same thing. If so, what do you suppose they do with the cheese from the holes?

Dew,

I would assume that if such an event happened, greatest risk danger for excessive bleeding due to cheese consumption would come from swiss cheese as it is already full of holes.

go seek,

Thanks for the blow by blow announcements. I am more nervous than I thought I would be.

Vinny

P.S. If you keep doing such a good job, you could have a new a career as sports announcer.

go seek,

This line of inquiry if to be expected. They need to set rules for all kinds of transgenic animals for future submssions, but approval for the platform to make transgenic proteins in milk will be the only type of decision made today.

Someone sounded concerned about tough questions. That is the job of the panel, to ask tough questions and ponder the data with regard to risk vs benefits. Did you expect them to just smile and shake GTCB's collective hands at an impressive technical achievement?

Does the same math hold true for humans? :)

That is such a sexist comment!

Flo,

I am very impressed by your dog! Does it resemble the owner?

I think the goats would have more fun if it were illegal. That always works for me!!

correction. I guess that means GTCB's plans to let the goats have vacation days where they get to spend time in the local bars and goat brothels will have to be cancelled.

MTB,

Well said. I hope you don't mind if I latch onto your post and echo your thoughts.

Vinny

Madcity,

No I haven't over looked anything, but it is obvious you have. Why don't you take a guess first, and then I will tell you what I think?