Funny thing is that the two presumed shorts-
one's fund is small and cant take much more pain.
the other is down 30-40% on the year and probably cant take much more pain.
We'll see how it goes for them.

Someone just dumped 10k at market- which is a bizarre way to sell. Shorts clearly dont want this to close above 10.80, the 52-week high close.

Someone felt the need to mark it down 11 cents with a trade at the close.

More confirmation we are going higher.

I suspect those options that traded Friday were sold by market maker who could be short up to 50,000 shares to make his trade delta neutral. Could have also been a long trimming. Should be an interesting week.

Huge discount on this deal. Wow. Almost 20% in the hole.

Someone just bought some dec 7.5 Calls

RA is out of NBIX because they saw the head to head Elogolix/Proellex data.

Everyone who has seen the data comparison feels the Proellex data is far superior. Period.

Congrats longs- RPRX is one of the few stocks flat to up on the year.

IT was probably removed b/c it was OT but it is also wrong to some degree.

While correct that the secondary marketed by Lazard (which would have also served to allow company to trade on US markets) was pulled, a deal did get done in the form of a private placement which was agencied by Cannacord. Efficacy participated in that deal.

I presume by the posting that HPtaxis was trying to imply that Osmetech was blowing up or Efficacy was stuck in an investment that couldnt raise money or Efficacy didnt have enough $ to do the deal- none are true.

My sources say there were not enough #s of investors (there was enough $ to do deal) to allow the deal to qualify for US markets.

The Roth initiation is helpful in the sense that it adds a more small-cap generalist audience to the mix vs the historically HC only audience that many of these other brokers focus on. The HC only audience has been suffering as we know to a number of blowups, add OREX to that today and peak at the holders.

The deal was in fact priced above market. The 9/29 date of transaction (when the stock closed at $6.62) was the day the transaction closed. The deal terms were agreed to days before that when the stock was at $6. The deal was done at $6.50.

I wouldn't give Dew any credibility- he has no idea what he is talking about.

I wish you spent as much time reading company filings and press releases as you do posting. Read the PR from this month. They are not expected to utilize the shares soon. Many biotechs have a "just in case" shelf in place and with the recent Sept offering, the shares on the old shelf were exhausted.

The registration statement filed covering shares that COULD be issued in a subsequent offering to the funds that participated in the last offering should cash go below $10 MM and some 5 MM other shares is now effective- meaning it is "good to go" as far as the SEC is concerned.

This is typical protocol for a shelf and any other registration statement- it is filed, and then eventually declared effective by SEC (sometimes with "review" and comments, in which case the time lapse is longer).

The comment makes little sense to me. On the surface, the comment would appear to imply it is a lesser outcome to have an experienced, success-proven investor like Efficacy owning 30% rather than 4 crappy HC-funds who would rain stock from the sky due to poor performance, redemptions, etc. Additionally, I am not sure that Clark is aware of the composition of Efficacy's investor base- its a lot of their money and high net worth persons, rather than fund of fund fast money. Further reason it's great they're here.

I agree with that last statement. There was a fund who was telling others "stay away from that one" despite not having any fundamental arguments as to why- one can presume that fund is short. Ironically going into the proposed offering, potential investors were told the company was looking for existing holders to participate. This particular fund filed as owning a paltry amount as of 9/30. It's easy to box a position with a prime broker (not collapsing long shares against a short position).

i see the open interest as 2016. i think it was legit.

We will see short interest tomorrow. i dont think theyve started to cover.

I'm not so sure they're covering. The bogus move from $9.80 to $8s on Thursday was more shorting IMO. A long seller would have continued to sell into Fridays rally.

On one hand Quantum values the work of a scientist whose work produced NOTHING that worked.

On the other hand you have one of the most respected scientists in the US, John Reed who has vetted the data and FDA correspondences and likes what he sees- enough to go on the board.

But quantum is more focused on the former. Lets talk some data.

How ironic.

Her work didnt amount to anything and now she is working some womens health effort in Africa and he prior employer is succeeding at developing a womens health drug.

I disagree. The woman sounds like a crook and he defended the company vigorously.

I think shtick is exemplified by MNTA saying they'll get approval and/or filing incomplete bogus ANDAs. I think MNTA shareholders finally figured it out. Visium figured it out. By the time Trowe figures it out (like they did with ELN), the stock will be 2.

The whole premise of the Z.P. work was a sham. 3M had already tried to make it work with Bonnie and it failed.

She should have been sued for misrepresentation.

Justice prevailed.

Where is she now by the way? Let us know.

Thats the story i concluded as well. I may have let her have her research that didnt work but hey im probably too nice of a guy. LOL

Haveseen,
Dont know if you saw this or not but the presumed short had 2 blow ups in his portfolio 2 days in a row, the latest being a 95% haircut.
If that fund had any risk management skills, theyd have covered.

are you saying that 2000 traded or less than that number traded (by your "extra" comment)?

You're wrong about the short initiation price. Go to nasdaqtrader.com and follow the short interest movement bimonthly. It moved up a lot this Fall from 300k to 1.3 MM. Most of this was between $6.50 and $8. Avg cost is probably mid to low 7s. They're losing so far even with the market crashing. What happens to the stock if/when the market stops crashing?

Thats not consistent with the vision they are sharing with institutional accounts at the present time.


If you think it could be bought at $20 under some conspiracy wouldnt you be buying the hell out of it now? Where else are you going to get a double in this market?

I believe that if Efficacy hadnt have bought and drew a line in the sand we'd be trading far lower. Other longs would have capitulated- how many have there been (I can think of at least seven who have previously). I for one dont want more to capitulate. Look at how many retail longs here who claimed to have at one point owned six figures of shares- theyre gone. Having someone to stand up and say "I'll see this through" only emboldens others to hold- its human psychology. I'd rather have a $9+ stock than one at, for example, $3.

you're not thinking.

i) regarding posting who the short is. if someone is 99% sure who it is based on comments that fund has made but doesnt have a prime brokerage statement with the position on it- why would someone post it

ii) Regarding wanting Efficacy to buy more. You saw the statement on PharmaWire that the company is talking to prospective partners. If someone from Efficacy is on the board and negotiations started and he is participating in them, do you think that person would be able to buy in the open market- in the US there are insider trading rules

Think.

One of our presumed shorts just had a blow up this morning being long UTHR. The vice keeps tightening.

The comical thing is that many of these names were superpumped by brokers too and they still have crappy performance.

I knew I needed to double down on my MNTA short at $15 when Morgan Stanley started talking about the company. My theory is the harder they are pumped the harder they fall. RPRX has been the posterchild for no pumping, almost no broker support at all. Slow and steady with strong shareholder base wins the race.

Actually I removed the content of my message as it was not substanitative and only insulted the I hub admin.

I repeat, once this stock market stops crashing or the shorts stop printing more shares off we go.

i) Fibroids P2b study stat sig
ii) Fibroids Pivotal trials enrolling
iii) Endo P2a stat sig. interim look on P2b stat sig. P2b stat sig vs Lupron
iv) Data kicks Elogolix data to the curb
v) Carc studies done
vi) pilot QT study done
vii) Markets are huge and unaddressed
viii) Pharma pipelines bare
ix) Pharma flush with cash
x) Huge short interest with shorts assuming erroneously that FDA hasnt signed off on holiday period and erroneously thinking they could participate in the offering
xi) limited shares for sale
xii) Top shareholder with history of selling and/or extracting massive value for fellow shareholders

As soon as the shorts decide to stop printing shares OR the market stops crashing, we will be at 10 in a zip.

zip you pooped out on us. where are u today.

One flow broker is looking to buy 200k for someone.

I believe there shouldnt be a lot of shares available- we dont have funds that are blowing up left in the name.

enough definitive intelligence that i would bet it on a side bet.

One of the most reassuring points about this name is the short thesis. First they were short on the financing risk. Then it was some esoteric point which made no sense about a PI/II Euro trial (the subsequent US studies were stat sig). Now its that the FDA hasnt signed off on the holiday period- I would suggest they recheck their source on this.

What will it be next month?

"In November 2008, we received guidance from the FDA suggesting submission of a new IND to the Division of Metabolic and Endocrine Products, or DMEP, for the investigation of Androxal for an additional potential indication as a treatment for type 2 diabetes. We plan to submit a new IND for this indication to the DMEP as soon as practicable."

Care to rethink your statements?

I think it totally depends on stock price. Historically, when a transaction is going to happen, lower prices generally lead to M&A and higher stock prices end up leading to licensing/partnering. Here we have a situation where the larger holders believe the company is significantly undervalued. Stock price probably dictates to some degree what happens b/c i dont think a lot of people involved in this name would be happy with a M&A transaction (100-200% premium) off of the current stock price.

What a joke trading.

Someone ticks us down on 100 shares to 8.20. someone puts in a big bid at 8.20 and shows it and nothing trades.
These shorts are getting desperate.

My best advice to him is this:
i) stop contacting top shareholders
ii) stop wasting time posting and hypothecating
iii) buy the stock and put it away