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 wouldn’t take anything that poster says as having any value. He she it posts in all caps and doesn’t care that nobody likes it. I’m sorry but if someone can’t express an idea without shouting he will have no audience.
JL, you are right - it is complicated. This website was so slow last night that it was impossible to edit and try to make it more readable. Let me just say this. If I could get a script for Vascepa my current co-pay, because I’m in stage 4 for Part D drug cost, would be only $45 and change for 90 days (5% of total Silverscript plan price). If I wait till January, starting a new Part D year, I’ll be on stage 2 (my plan has no deductible) and my cost will be maybe $150-180 for 90 days.
JL, The donut hole moves each year, and is defined by dollar levels for your total out-of-pocket cost for prescription fills through the current year. There are 4 stages of drug costs, depending on where you are wrt the donut hole. If your plan has a deductible, stage 1 applies, where you pay 100% of the plan formulary price. One the deductible is satisfied, or from $0 if no deductible to the OOP (out-of-pocket) donut hole entry point is stage 2, when you pay the formulary co-pay for your plan. Once you pass the entry point you are in the donut hole, stage 3, and your costs go up, except that during Bush2 an accelerating subsidy was passed to pay much of the donut hole premium. At the current point in time the subsidy covers more than the premium. When your total Part D OOP exceed the upper band of the donut hole you enter stage 4, where your cost will not exceep 5% of the formulary price for your plan.
Here are the boundary levels for 2019:
stage 1: deductibe stage = you pay 100%
stage 2: from deductible satisfaction to $3820 total Part D OOP
Stage 3: from total Part D OOP of $3820 to $5100
stage 4: from total Part D OOP of $5100 to whatever
Here is a practical example from my own Silverscript plan in CA:
(I am just entering stage 4, so any fills for the rest of the year will have very low copays)
T Drug Cost Copay stage Gap-Subsidy Filled date Plan paid
$96.17 $96.17 2 0 2-15-2019 $-
$140.48 $105.00 2 0 5-09-2019 $35.48
$138.19 $51.13 3 0 7-27-2019 $87.06
$114.21 $5.71 4 0 10-27-2019 $108.50
This is a generic. There was no subsidy.
Here is another example for a tier 4 brand drug:
T Drug Cost Copay stage Gap-Subsidy Filled date Plan paid
$1,851.40 $833.13 2 0 3-25-2019 $1,018.27
$1,851.40 $462.85 3 $1,295.98 7-03-2019 $92.57
$1,851.40 $165.56 3 $255.53 10-09-2019$1,430.31
Next refill will be lower cost if still in 2019.
This will probably be easier to read is copy/pasted into Excel or even Word.
JL, just a thought here. Could it be that your latest refill put you into the Part D donut hole which automatically brings donut hole subsidies into play and could give you a lower co-pay in effect?
I should proofread my posts or at least look back after posting. AMRN, not amren.
I have it on very good authority that FFS thinks amren presents an excellent opportunity at this time and that yesterday’s hit did no damage technically. He thinks the momentum is still very strong in the uptrend, having encountered very high volume support at the bottom of the attack.
Speaking of Ford, did anyone else see the premiere of the new Mustang SUV, all electric with 300 mile range?
This Oppenheimer is way too small to be called a boutique shop. It’s more like a street vendor.
I propose a mass grave. We can pray over them and then have a dance party.
I don’t think it’s legal to send explosives through the mail.
That’s truly idiotic. There is no way in hell that Acasti gets a cardiovascular benefit label without an outcomes trial. To suggest otherwise is just plain stupid.
I’ve been at TDA for a long time and regularly change the tax lot assignment from FIFO to LIFO or specific ID for particular transactions so as not to disturb my long-term basis on certain symbols.
We don’t disagree. Settlement date is not effective date but rather two days after effective date. NASDAQ used to publish effective date, settlement date and dissemination date but dropped the effective date from their calendar and notices.
Sorry but we won’t know until two weeks after that how many covered on Friday. The effective date for the next short report will be November 13 not November 15 (the settlement date for trades effective November 13). The next short interest report will include the effect of those who covered or shorted more on Wednesday before the Adcom.
At TDA you can go online anytime before settlement and change the assigned purchase for a trade from FIFO to LIFO or specific ID. I do this regularly after short term trades so as not to disturb my long-term basis.
I suspect you can do the same at other online brokerages.
He has to do whatever he can with the IRS threatening to seize his cardboard box.
That is a joke. They are trying to piggyback on Reduce-it but they ran a minuscule short term trial and I can almost guarantee they will fail if they ever manage to run a large scale long-term outcomes trial. The hype that they will be able to get approval and a cardiovascular label without an outcomes trial is laughable. They don’t seem to understand that it is not about trig lowering but about risk reduction.
It had to be a planned sale and he could not change it so late in the game without being guilty of inside trading.
Thanks for reminding me of one of my bitter pills, AMLN. Although I did make money trading it, I sold my entire position the night before it was acquired.
You are wrong in my opinion. His assertions merit no attention whatsoever due to his demonstrated incompetence and/or ulterior agenda.
Good point! There may not be any profit for people who buy calls with very high implied volatility and then want to sell them after volatility collapses following a major event. For example, the $17.50 call expiring next Friday was priced at $2.225 at the close two days ago. If you buy that call for $2.00 you will need the share price to be $19.50 on Friday just to break even.
If you sold puts and then were assigned shares at that strike price then your cost basis is not the strike price but rather the strike price less the premium collected.
It is much too kind to call him an idiot and a dinosaur because those words imply but he doesn’t know any better. I think he knows exactly what he’s doing, which is talking his book.
Thanks a lot - now you’ve infected me. I’m old enough to remember that very well. I grew up across the street from the studio lot where the mouseketeers worked, and also two blocks away from Annette.
In fact, it’s more confusing than settlement date versus dissemination date. The effective date of the short interest is two trading days prior to the settlement date. I have never understood why we, the retail traders, have to wait two weeks to learn what the short interest was.
The Jan $11 put trade went off at 12:23 PM at $0.67-$0.68, and at that price was almost certainly a sell rather than a buy. The Nov $15 put trade went off at the exact same time at $1.40 and these two trades are part of a larger strategy. I’m inclined to think that the $15 put was also a sell and not a buy.
I did not write the FDA guidance, so don’t blame me.
21 days is not a guaranteed availability date. FDA guidance is for the briefing documents to be available to sponsors and panel members between 14 to 21 days prior to the scheduled meeting.
The sponsor and the panelists should receive the complete briefing docs 14-21 days prior to the scheduled adcom, and the public version should be available on the FDA website a minimum of 48 hours prior to the scheduled adcom.
“Well they should have”
That’s what I said to a woman in my office many many years ago when she said that her parents had never told her to shut up.
The link at the bottom of the message to which you replied is the link to the guidelines. And in that document you will also find the link to the website where the briefing documents will be available to the public two days before the meeting.
The briefing docs will be released to the public at least two full business days prior to the Adcom meeting and from memory I seem to recall that the docs are released to the sponsor and the panelists 14 to 21 days prior to the Adcom meeting. I have the FDA Adcom guidelines saved on a PC and if I get a chance I’ll look for it and reply to this post if necessary. Edit: I just read through the guidelines on my phone and the 14 to 21 days I posted is correct, along with of course the 2 full business days for public release on the FDA website.
https://www.fda.gov/media/75436/download
Thank you very much for sharing your personal story. Sorry to hear of your illness but glad you’re doing so well. I will pass your experience on to my friend and hopefully his wife will be able to get similar relief.
This is the only mention I found on the board of irritable bowel syndrome. The wife of a friend has been plagued with IBS for a few years now and her diet is down to plain rice and simple vegetables. Before I suggest to my friend that his wife might want to try Vascepa for possible relief of this cursed condition, does anyone have any direct experience to offer?
Acasti will never succeed in getting a cardiovascular label (piggybacking on the Vascepa label). It’s a relatively small study (600 some participants) over a relatively short term (26 weeks). If they succeed in lowering triglycerides, so what? There is no established causal relationship. If they want the label they will have to run a large scale long-term outcomes study.
So, of the 38.9 million statin-treated population with triglycerides >=135, about 12% of the total American population or about 20% of the adult US population, what percentage would be considered successful market penetration by Vascepa?
Asked and answered. MNTB is a joke and that’s all it is.
The published open interest tomorrow morning will reveal more. At the open this morning the open interest in the March $20 call was 1418, and in the September 13 $16 call was 361.
Lol! I forgot to qualify that trade time. Would have been 10:16 AM New York time.
A 3000 call buy went down at 7:16 this morning when the share price was $15.20 plus or minus. The call price was $2.40, x100 x 3000 = $720,000. It was definitely a buy and not a sell.