...
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.
RARE:
They recently update what they are expecting the IPO price 19-20
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1515673/000119312514025237/d665915dfwp.htm
I am guessing it probably trades much higher and I don't see myself taking a position any time soon even though I liked Emil at BMRN, and like the focus of the company. In this market while I wouldn't consider it way overpriced I look at in comparison to when I got BMRN at a lower market cap and they had an approved product (Aldurazyme) and one in very late stage development. IMO I think Ultragenyx still is several years away from an approved product and who knows what may happen in Biotech between now and then.
NKTR 102 + PARP:
It is slide 13 from JP Morgan available here for anyone following our discussion who may be interested.
http://www.nektar.com/pdf/20140114_presentation.pdf
The webcast is available here:
http://jpmorgan.metameetings.com/confbook/healthcare14/directlink.php?ticker=NKTR
I made a quick listen ealier but am still catching up on calls so didn't give it a good listen yet to comment on what HR said.
For what its worth BMRN had said about one problem with past PARP+chemo attempts where the trials where dosing down on the PARP. Biomarin thinks the PARP dosing should be given preferentially and theorized that substantially lower chemo doses could produce an additive effect.
GLPG.BR:
Its up 5% on a down day I think it may have to do with this sum-of-the-parts calculation by UBS
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BfI7YIYCAAAreTH.jpg:large
I don't have access to the full report but found a few things curious about it. First they don't include the rest of the company (they have a pretty good revenue stream with services) and the probability of success seems odd to me (I'd expect a bigger difference between a Phase 2b asset and preclinical)
H/T to BioStockAddict @BioStockAddict
BMRN / PARPs:
That is certainly a fair criticism (I was going to and perhaps should have add a "Lets see how that translates in the clinic" to my post). I need to caveat what I am going to say with I don't have the science background of many here. I've thought PARPs in general seem to be best suited to combine with other agents. If this turns out so the better targeted nature and high potency would make BMRN's drug more amenable to doing so. Coincidentally another company I own has started looking at combining their drug (NKTR-102) with a PARP (I don't recall if they've indicated which one(s)).
BMRN / CLVS / AZN (PARPs):
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2014/01/27/1535-7163.MCT-13-0803.short?rss=1
List of Filed Bio/Pharma IPO's
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BfF6vXXCQAA-3Dr.jpg:large
H/T Vikram Khanna @VikramKhanna_
CLVS:
Sorry no notes from me I am still catching up on JPM calls . I don't follow them too closely I more follow them because of BMRN's PARP which I have an interest in. If anyone else did listen I'd appreciate notes/comments as well.
The replay is up and slides are available from here
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails&c=247187&eventID=5091019
Direct Link to Slides PDF:
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MjE4MTIxfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1
I try not to let day-to-day market fluctuations influence my decisions too much as I don't think I can predict market tops or bottoms. That being said I saw some of the price action today as an opportunity to reduce one speculative position (GCVRZ) and to add to a few positions I see as a longer term buy and hold (SRPT, PLX and BIND). Still a large number of Bio's I watch/follow haven't moved enough for me to take a position .
Clovis Oncology Has an R&D Day today starting at 11:00am EST. The webcast is available here
http://ir.clovisoncology.com/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails&c=247187&eventID=5091019
On at least one Roche CC they commented on EMA wanting to see more data. I specifically recall Roche addressing the safety concern saying individual patient data needed to be looked at as they felt they could explain the differences. It may very well have been the case (I don't believe Roche ever elaborated like if they had other health conditions or risk factors). It was just enough to be a concern for me on Mabthera to be superior in efficacy along with more convenient should be a big plus even with the Gazyva approval. Though for HALO it would be a lot better if Roche intended to develop SC for that and T-DM1.
According to the ASH poster (December '12) N=127.
My concern with SC Herceptin (aside from T-DM1) is there was a safety issue whether explainable or not it was enough of a concern for EMA to delay approval and I'd suspect its at least a bit of a concern. I don't have a science background so I don't know why there may be a safety issue in HER2 vs. CD20 patients.
I agree I wonder how many people are aware that SC has a descent chance to show superior efficacy when the second stage is completed. It would seem to me the larger sample size should be enough to give statistical significance.
That being said I am not a big HALO bull though as I only have a small position at this time.
Auspex Pharma:
Anyone look at them or familiar with the company? I heard their presentation at
http://www.retailroadshow.com/roadshows.asp
and found them interesting. Its not my top choice but if the IPO market is flooded it could get cheap (everyone seems hot on UltraGenyx which I like too but I prefer cheap ). They are selling 5.5 million+825k shares in the 10-12 range (expected) and would end up with 21-22M shares outstanding.
They are developing a drug for hyperkinetic movement disorders. They have created a modified tetrabenazine (better dosing, tolerability and I believe better pK). Part of the proposition is they have a new CoM and think they can target several diseases (Huntington's,
I also like a couple of other things they have management from companies I've liked/invested in and they have another compound that is a pirfenidone analog (improved tolerability, dosing).
I would be interested in anyone elses opinion.
Their website is http://www.auspexpharma.com/
no problem. Thanks for summary info.
Here is the 8-k with more detail. In it says Units are 1 share + 1 warrant. Still going through it...
http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/displayfilinginfo.aspx?FilingID=9721061-1049-458314&type=sect&TabIndex=2&companyid=881346&ppu=%252fdefault.aspx%253fcik%253d1549084
Lucky you! Wonder why the PR says 1 option. Do you know how long the lock up is on the stock?
I still can't find anything on the website or SEC search page. I don't have PM and don't like to post an email public. I'll probably try to contact the company later.
Technically its a positive opinion but decision is usually a rubber stamp and full approval should follow in a couple months.
Here is the only document I could find with info. Seems they had some questions back in November and that is probably what delayed things.
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Agenda/2014/01/WC500159821.pdf
Where do you see its 1/2 warrant per unit and that the stock is restricted?
Yes options are at $2 which is in the money. I was talking about $1 for each unit which consisted of 1 common and 1 warrant. I am not sure where you get the 10 million figure from. Its a great deal considering the stock is in the mid 2's now.
I still haven't seen any SEC filings to better understand the company so I have no position. The technology does seem interesting but the stock is trading at a substantial premium to the offering price.
The replay is available now. You must have blinked and missed it was only 8 minutes . I didn't listen yet to the Patient Webinar from the other day that may be more substantive.
I don't get the big price differential from the offering price. Not that it doesn't seem like a good story but 20M units at $1 with each unit having an in the money warrant. If there isn't a long lock out it should be pretty tempting to take some money off the table once it expires.
Looks like SC MabThera finally on CHMP agenda for this month
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Agenda/2014/01/WC500159821.pdf
Medivir JPM:
I didn't see them listed in the names of presenting companies. Maybe they were one that was there but not presenting (I noticed several I looked at going through the Biotech Showcase listed themselves as being at JPM too even though they weren't presenting).
RARE (Ultragenyx):
They have an updated S-1 out. 4.8 Million shares + 725k (28M total outstanding if 5.5M sold). Price range 14-17 not too bad IMO if it trades in that range.
Link to full S-1A
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1515673/000119312514014673/0001193125-14-014673-index.htm
Webcasts/Company Disclosure:
I think its a hairy line about what is material and not so I'd rather have things all be webcasts (especially breakouts as Brad Loncar and others suggested). This would help to level the playing field. I once got in a little heated discussion about a company changing its trial (The size was changed and I believe an end point slightly modified but not certain of my recollection on that part) and selectively disclosing in it. It wasn't my intent to make it a heated discussion but the other party got defensive when I said I thought it was material. I don't want to say who it was publicly but needless to say the company doesn't do a good job of making all that is said in meetings available to all shareholders.
Thanks Blade.
Not singling them out but I don't get why some companies go to conferences and don't webcast. I would think a major purpose of a conference is to get your story out.
Ablynx JPM:
I didn't see a link for a replay of their webcast. Did you happen to listen or better yet do you have a link? TIA
2014 Biotech Showcase Webcasts
Just to follow up I didn't find direct links to webcasts from the Biotech Showcase website and went to several websites of individual companies and found very few had them available! In fact judging by the quality of many of the company websites its probably for the best as an investment would be quite speculative (based on the impression given by their websites) so probably no real loss. I did find a BLRX webcast link though I haven't heard it yet ( http://www.media-server.com/m/p/8uy942nn )
Here is the link I think this is the slide your referring to. http://jpmorgan.metameetings.com/slides/healthcare14/13775/Slide6.jpg
XNPT:
That seems like an odd time to PR information like this. Why not either tomorrow AM or the dreaded Friday evening.
I'll probably listen to a few and skim through a few more probably not right away though. Some are companies I've looked at in the past and just curious about (e.g. ARDM, CANFY, NEO), some I've looked at briefly and want to look more at (SKP.L and BLRX) and I'll probably go through some that seem to be areas of interest (like orphan focus). The only one I am familiar enough to really be curious about is BLRX and there it is one of their earlier stage programs that interests me (Celiac Disease) so I'd probably wait to see what happens with their AML drug.
I would say the Dodgers aren't they the new Yankees in terms of spending $$$
ECYT / EMA PRAC:
I don't follow the company so don't know the issues with a positive recommendation. Here is a link to the PRAC page
http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/about_us/general/general_content_000537.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058058cb18
Looking at last month's the agenda was December 2-5 and the highlights are dated the 6th so maybe today is when it was expected and that is why the jump in the stock? I don't know when the report makes it to the webiste (perhaps there is a way to get access to what happened at the meeting before?)
ECYT:
Don't know if this is the reason but they are listed on EMA Agenda
http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Agenda/2014/01/WC500159320.pdf
I find that really impressive especially in this industry its on par with a good royalty company. They are right between two I once owned (I no longer have positions in either)
Franco-Nevada Corporation 20 employees 6.2B
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=FNV+Profile
Royal Gold, 21 employees 3.3B
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=RGLD+Profile
RTRX:
Martin tweeted yesterday that @theflynews had it wrong and it was "DEFINITELY not true" & "NO DISCOUNT" (all caps his quote not my emphasis)
https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli
Top 10 Little White Lies Told At The JP Morgan Healthcare Conference
by Bruce Booth
http://lifescivc.com/2014/01/top-10-little-white-lies-told-at-the-jp-morgan-healthcare-conference/
I like #7
I saw an article on that the other day but it didn't report how much interest they acquired did you happen to see how much it was?
So you think that the LA writer is justified in not voting for anyone in the steroid ERA because they all might have taken PEDs? What about all the 70's players that took amphetamines which also would likely improve performance (albeit in another fashion).
I think you misunderstood my point. I am not saying players who took PEDs should be allowed in I am saying right now the voters are deciding whether they think they did or didn't take and voting accordingly. I think it should be a separate matter and if baseball decides steroid users do not belong in the hall they should do so by not having them on the ballot and removing any from the hall that slip through the voting process.