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.
Kiwi,
we agree on most points. Brexit detracts from global GDP (a little) and comes at a time when confidence is already low. Safe haven currencies will naturally rise which of course includes USD.
So the news is not good. But as investors, we all need to determine if the serious drop in price satisfactorily rewards you for the negative news. UK bank Barclays dropped 20% in one day.
I'd probably rather own HSBC long term but might trade BCS.
In Feb the US market was convinced we were heading into recession. A few months later we had a V shaped recovery. So pick your poison. A great company at a low price is usually a good recipe for success. Stocks like Novartis seem obvious to me.
If we get a very bad opening on Monday I will be a buyer of something.
my friend's refi is business for the lender and forced savings to him. It doesn't other companies or the overall economy...I don't believe I ever stated otherwise.
Also, I didn't buy anything today as (like you)I'm not convinced that valuations won't get better. I also remember Oct 1987 when a bad Friday turned into Black Monday. I almost never buy on bad Fridays.
But buying great companies on weakness has always worked. Quality always recovers. I won't be disappointed at all if we fall hard again on Monday.
my friend has not refinanced. He just began the process so he gets the (small) benefit of today's lower rates.
The brexit vote is a highly visible event. It raises political risk everywhere. It raises stress. So short term it's disruptive to everyone's buying habits.
fyi. my friend is moving to a 15 year loan and will simply pay off his mortgage a lot quicker with tiny additional payments.
Lastly, risk premiums obviously rise in times like this. And no one said they will disappear overnight. But as always, buy great companies at reasonable prices and you will do well. And lower interest rates help valuations...particularly for long duration assets
The EU will need to punish the UK in their trade negotiations in order to send a signal to the remaining EU countries. The Scots voted to remain and I doubt they will threaten now to leave.
The domino theory has some credibility so it bears watching
Global central banks will again try to stimulate but it will take more than lower interest rates and QE programs. The global consumer becomes more cautious short-term but the offset is lower rates. A good friend is refinancing their mortgage....he's a winner.
Still...the implications are mild for the US. Use weakness to buy great companies.
ok, I agree that there is an impact upon our global companies due to currency. I doubt however that S&P earnings forecasts will come down by much...but agree that it is unfavorable not favorable.
There are still thousands of smaller, domestic oriented companies that are unaffected by currency.
The Brexit vote is a major shock to the UK political elite and perhaps a message to other politicians that popularism is growing.
Trump will hear this message.
The other effect is that the US Fed will be less likely to raise rates in July or Sept.
they don't go after other assets. They are very concerned about unsecured debits. And what looks like gentlemen don't act like gentlemen when they are facing unsecured debits. But keep things in context...the market is down twice the amount of yesterday's advance.
Every brokerage firm is sending out notices to take care of margin calls promptly before day 4 when margin calls are due.
Some of the UK effect is an unwind of the rally of the past 1 1/2
weeks.
JL's comments are entirely correct
The UK represents approx. 4% of global GDP. It's a big problem to a small country. They will have lower GDP growth going forward and perhaps higher inflation due to a much lower currency. It's an emotional impact upon US companies but not much else. Our exports to UK are small.
In a low growth world everyone is looking for dependable returns and have rushed into utilities and telecom. The utility index is at all time high valuations and is a rubber band that is stretched too far.
If Reduce-It works then it will find an easy audience for investors looking for growth in a no-growth world. Unlike Invest, I could make a case that the impact would be greater than if the world were rosy and there were growth opportunities everywhere.
Kiwi / STS,
the real reason that investors want to be owners of a convert is because in case AMRN goes BK they get prior clam to the assets of the company...eg. the patent portfolio.
They get the security of a bond plus the upside of a stock.
This is the one and only reason
just for comparison cost to borrow Square (SQ) is > 40%
no...still only 2% cost to borrow.
don't forget to include the cost to borrow. Presently 2% for AMRN
Sure...no problem.
I agree that based upon my lipids I would appear to be at low risk. My family has history of CVD and I had been on low dose Lipitor for many years. I had no statin side effects but I never liked the idea of taking a statin for the remainder of my life.
I told my PCP that I wanted to substitute V for Lipitor and see what happens. He said to first stop taking Lipitor and re-check lipids. Made good sense.
Shortly afterwards I had chest pains one evening and saw the doc then next morning. Resting EKG was normal but he still sent me to a cardiologist the same day. I think he was just being cautious. I had an ultrasound that afternoon which was ok. I later followed up with a stress test which I also passed. I told the doc that I wanted a calcium stress test and he said ok ...it was not perfect but ok.
I still wanted V. He said that it would do nothing for me. I told him that I was interested in the anti-inflammatory characteristics of V and was open to the belief (per JL) that CVD was an inflammatory disease and not a lipid disorder. He was reluctant. I told him that I knew his background (Harvard, U Chicago) and that my non-medical background was just as strong.
There was more give and take and he finally said ok.....perhaps just to amuse me.
Kiwi,
I don't see that as a challenge, I think you're agreeing with me.
The doc is completely in charge. The patient has no voice because the health risk and knowledge mis-match are both too high.
So the doc better be well informed and hopefully be willing to prescribe off label. It's obvious that with successful Reduce-It
that it will be prescribed to the Reduce-It population. But Fishy was saying that it would be malpractice not to prescribe it anyone on a statin. That's where I disagree.
Btw, I was referred to a cardiologist and he was reluctant at first to give me a prescription. I argued with confidence, got his respect, and he relented. But as I take a look at the patients in the waiting room at either the PCP or cardiologist it's obvious that 99% will never has any say.
I am not convinced.. Reduce-It is for TGs>150.
If someone like me has their LDLs well controlled and has TGs way under 100, I'm not convinced that all docs will even think about prescribing Vascepa. I got it because I was assertive and essentially told the doc that I had a good understanding of the drug and would be his one-man clinical trial. Most patients who see their PCP or cardiologist are unwilling and incapable of challenging the doc.
I certainly don't see any malpractice if the doc does not prescribe V outside of the Reduce-It indication
Fwiw, I have no problem whatsoever with JL. I come here to others' opinion and he has plenty to offer. But it doesn't mean that I agree with everything he or anyone else says. For example, he believes that the drug will sell itself after Reduce-It since we are in the internet age. Supporting that belief was the experience of Agouron Pharmaceuticals which was the maker of Viracept, a protease inhibitor that became a very successful-viral in the attack on the AIDS epidemic. The drug needed very little marketing because they were dealing with a very intelligent, very motivated audience. I don't believe the task will be as simple with Vascepa..... even with Reduce it.
But I'm happy to have JL, HDG, and many others on the board. I have worked with many PHDs, and even more finance guys and find them both very informative
Thanks Kiwi,
Actually I wasn't expressing an opinion as much as I was asking a question. So I was surprised by the tone of his response.
I am personally taking Livalo since I am genetically predisposed to have high LDLs. I take Vascepa completely off label primarily because of the research from Zum and assertions from JL.
JL's 35 mil market size excludes people like me who do not have mixed dyslipidemia.
JL,
If a patient's LDLs are well controlled on a low dose statin, has normal HDLs, normal TGs, normal blood pressure, etc, and if Reduce-IT shows overwhelming risk reduction, will the doc likely prescribe Vascepa?
if yes, the audience is more than 35 mil US. If no, it is much less.
valuation of early stage biotechs is a lot of art.
It's tough enough to get the earnings model correct but the discount rate is equally important. Since you previously posted that Reduce-it would be successful at the final look with 100% certainty then perhaps a 25% discount rate is appropriate. If anything, it seems low to me but it's really anyone's guess.
Btw. take a look at Sun Trust's cash flow projections. He is not projecting more financings.
Kiwi,
I choose not to post often but I need to clarify the price target as others have also attempted to do for you.
The target is a ONE YEAR price target. As HDG explained, one of the methods used is to apply a P/E of 35 X 2022 earnings of 1.21=
$42.35 and discounts it back at 25% to achieve a target of $10.
This is a very common method of valuing biotechs with no earnings.
Challenge the discount rate if you don't believe it represents the appropriate risk. Challenge also the P/E if you believe it is too high.
Taken together, a lower P/E obviously gives a lower future value and a higher discount rate obviously gives a lower present value.
That said, it's a one year target.
it's been available on Bloomberg all along. It's not new news at all.
Ask Me About Vascepa ...a cupcake solution
The dilemma seems to be that the AMRN sales force is fully allowed to educate the doctor of the merits of V as long as the doctor initiates the discussion. But their hands are tied behind their back if they are forced to simply leave collateral material or if the doctors simply don't ask.
So the trick is to get the doc to ask ...
How about the salesperson walks into the doctor's with a dozen cupcakes and wearing a badge ...Ask Me About Vascepa. They get the cupcakes only if they ask. If not, no cupcakes.
More seriously ..."Ask Me About Vascepa" should be our new PR message. It's a simple solution.
perhaps Stumbling Bear
see post #52894
I stopped both V and Livalo in order to create a baseline.
I assume that Livalo was the problem but not sure. I will probably go back first on V, take blood test, then choose a different statin if needed.
Interestingly, my trigs went up modestly as did LDL
fyi. had to stop V + Livalo after only 6 weeks
due to elevated liver enzymes.
no mechanism to naked short?
I don't know what you mean with this post. Fwiw, naked shorting refers to the illegal shorting of stocks when you sell short without previously finding shares to borrow.
it's easy to get a locate to short amrn shares legally so the entire concept of naked shorting is irrelevant. (granted I didn't look today for millions of shares). The cost to borrow is also low indicating plenty of availability.
LOL ...you're probably correct
The answer is A
If someone wanted to trade most aggressively on a leak or rumor, he'd buy a ton of short dated puts for maximum leverage.
But it's a complete an in-your-face trade sure to be noticed. I assume most that trade on inside information would prefer to be more discreet.
My 2 cents regarding large PUT trade
fwiw, I remember watching the options market prior to Adcom looking for unusual activity. I noticed the trade shortly after it happened although at this time I no longer recall the strike price. Together with the AF comments, the short position, and the fact that the stock wasn't acting well, I remember telling a friend that all the warning signs of a bad event were here. I wasn't predicting anything but I simply stated that we only have ourselves to blame if we don't take action.
Needless to say, we didn't. So much for supposedly being a Pro. I have been investing for a long time and have never seen quite the reality show drama that I have seen with this stock. I must say that it's been interesting and I have learned a lot. There are plenty of lessons here, I hope we all learn from them.
So...to answer your question about the Puts.
The buyer was either a speculator (with perhaps some tip about the Adcom), or a long owner looking to hedge his position with a married put. The put seller (remember this is a bullish position) could have been a short seller looking to hedge his short ...i.e. entering into a covered short position. Or it might have been the specialist hedging some other position.
The trade was large enough to have triggered some surveillance at the option exchange imho. If we all noticed it, I am sure that the exchange also noticed it. And is the trade traceable? Yes, with almost 100% certainty.
Btw. others on this board have praised your efforts on the behalf of all shareholders. I just wish to add that I greatly admire your passion and hope to meet you one day irrespective of the AMRN outcome.
there is almost NO action in any of the weeklies in July. There is a little action in the July Monthly contract which makes some sense because most investors go where there is liquidity and that's usually the monthly. But the July monthly has pretty big open interest but traded only 90 contracts in total on Friday for all strikes.....that's tiny.
But even if your thesis is correct about the July 10 option, maybe people would rather pay a little more for another week just in case there is a delay and July 7 is not so important after all.
All in all, I'd rather just buy the stock but if I were a penny option trader I'd buy the monthly for both of the above reasons.
July 10 options
Will, the options have no open interest because they probably should not exist in the first place.
Do you really need additional leverage provided by options for a $2 stock? The stock itself is basically a long-dated option.
And...because of lack of interest, the bid / offer spread is so wide that it basically provides no liquidity or value, which also drives investors into the stock instead of the option.
There is nothing else here imho...spread are very high for many options these days but they're worse for weekly options.
No one should be trading the July 10's...they're better off with the stock. That's why there is no open interest.
Question to JL / others
I just starting taking Vascepa. I am also taking Livalo.
My trigs are fine, LDL ok, HDL ok, my weight and diet also ok.
I don't know my EPA or EPA/AA numbers.
Is there any reason to take less than 4 gm Vascepa since it's completely off label?
Another New Script
moving from Simvastatin to Livalo and adding V after a few weeks
why not low dose Lipitor or Crestor?
I know you're on max dose Crestor but why did you choose Livalo or Simvastatin instead of the others?
thanks again for the reply. Hope the stress test went well.
I am again not surprised at all with the response by your cardiologist. It is probably reasonable but it also demonstrates the difficulty in changing prescribing habits. Things will change over time and hopefully Reduce-it will be the catalyst.
I suspect that there are hundreds of thousands of patients in my situation. We think we're ok at LDL of 100, standards change and Docs want to increase the statin dose. I happen to also take CoQ10 for the statin side effects but am more worried about the side effects that I don't know. So I have no intentions of taking a higher dose statin but will instead push for Vascepa. I think it's a better choice.
Regards
thanks for the response.
It turns out that my diet is ok (I do in fact eat salmon twice a week), my weight is fine, I never smoke, and I am not a couch potato although I could exercise more. My family history includes some CAD although the past generation still lived to 90.
And I am not at all surprised that you suggested that I increase my statins and take Vascepa. But the purpose of the question was to test your confidence in the incremental benefit of 70 vs 100 LDL compared to the anti-inflammatory benefits of Vascepa.
Fwiw, I am not seeking medical advice from anyone here, MD or layman. But if you had to choose just one, which would you select? Higher statin or Vascepa given that I am already at LDL of 100 which until recently was the targeted level?
(my gut tells me that Vascepa would provide a greater benefit but I'm still interested in your opinion)
Question for Kiwi
(or anyone else)
If your LDL on low dose statin was 100 (down from 170 without statin), HDL and TGs ok
would you take a higher dose statin in order to lower LDL to new standard of 70, or would you take Vascepa
will be happy to do so
I'll be ok.
I have a cardiologist with good credentials whom I am just beginning to get to know.
btw. I received a canned response from Tammy Baldwin's office thanking me for the interest but suggesting that I contact my home state's Senator if I wanted to receive a more personal response.
Done
I live in Long Beach, work downtown LA.
Long Beach area is best but quality of doctor is most important.
Orange County is also ok, better than west LA.
many thanks in advance