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.
Jever,
….and .02 is coming too, right? With all due respect warranted, your mockery of my post is laughable and your attempts to manipulate the stock price are not welcome here by me and hopefully most others. Your routine is tired.
Big Blue
Eb0783,
Thanks for that information. DNAP did get two final rejection notices within the last month from the USPO; however, your statement gives strong hope that they will appeal both. Thanks again for all the information you have provided, its greatly appreciated.
Big Blue
Did anyone at the meeting ask about the Patents?
Big Blue
Gratli,
Thank you very much for the hard work. I am sure that many here appreciate your efforts.
Big Blue
Eb0783,
Thanks again for taking the time to post all this information! It really helps for those of us that wish they could have made the meeting.
Big Blue
Dear Foreward (Ref. Jever00)
I have stated this many times for both the optimists and pessimists...I like most on this board am hopeful for DNAP's long-term profitability and success; therefore, a good PR would be welcome and exciting for most. However, when hope, greed, or the need for attention spills over to posts that are emphatic and non factual, such as, News by the end of the week or we WILL break .009 today the quality of the board and all the good DD that can be found here gets watered down. As hopeful as some of us are we do not need non factual and misleading posts here. Simply put, Jever's and others like him post dogmatic crap that can mislead people. In the eloquent words of Miss Scarlet....an idiot (either way, if something is known or not).
Big Blue
Frogdreaming, very nicely put. You have bridged the gap between patent approval and the ending plausible inference of, you could discern that the statin patent could pay nicely. I had assumed that most would understand how to get from A to B; however, you painted a clearer picture for everyone that cares to look.
Big Blue
I got one Steve....you're made me laugh outloud.
Parabolic SAR Buy Signals hits today for DNAP
I do not trade this stock but I thought for those that do or would consider DNAP hit as a buy today. You will need to cut and paste the address below.
Big Blue
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.scan?s=TSA[t.t_eq_s]![t.e_eq_n]![as0,20,tv_gt_40000]![ap1,0.02...
Dr. Frudaky,
Thank you for the post. During the meeting, it would be nice if someone would ask if DNAP will appeal or abandon 10/120,804 & 09/964,059.
Big Blue
Frog very nice list.
I would expand the questions on trace to include:
What were / are the financials of the company?
What synergies exist between the two companies’s? How much will the company save // and expand revenue? When will the synergies be realized?
What projects were Trace working on that will be included into the DNAP pipeline?
I will not be able to attend the meeting but would love Frog's and the aforementioned questions to be addressed during the meeting.
Big Blue
Hi Altarboy,
It’s extremely hard to quantify patent revenue from afar without having DNAPrint’s strat plan. However, considering that statins, as a group, are the world’s most prescribed drugs, you could discern that the statin patent could pay nicely. The issue is that the drugs could keep changing for drug and generic protection as seen in the PR today from PFE. The PFE PR below misses the main financial point that PFE will protect the drug for years and in essence protect billions by changing it. If DNAP tests can keep up with the changes of statin drugs the statin patent could be worth more.
Big Blue
Press Release Source: Pfizer Inc
Pfizer Begins Production at Torcetrapib/Atorvastatin Manufacturing Facility; Major Milestone for Potential Cardiovascular Medicine
Wednesday June 22, 8:39 am ET
First Batch Produced at New $90 Million Plant Expansion in Loughbeg, Ireland
NEW YORK, June 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- More than 15 years after Pfizer researchers set out to design a novel medicine that could significantly reduce the risk of heart disease, the company has begun production at a $90 million plant expansion in Ireland.
The facility will manufacture torcetrapib, which Pfizer is combining with Lipitor (atorvastatin calcium) in a new medicine. Torcetrapib was discovered as part of its research efforts to raise HDL, or "good" cholesterol. Researchers believe HDL plays an important role in heart disease.
Pfizer believes torcetrapib/atorvastatin will build on the proven efficacy and safety of Lipitor, the world's most-prescribed medicine to lower LDL, or "bad" cholesterol. Numerous studies with statins have established the critical importance in LDL-lowering for reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, the world's leading killer of men and women. Pfizer's scientists are testing the hypothesis that simultaneously raising HDL and lowering LDL could provide an even greater reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease.
The production of the first batch of torcetrapib at Pfizer's Loughbeg, Ireland, facility is the latest in a series of torcetrapib/atorvastatin milestones.
Pfizer has undertaken the largest and most comprehensive clinical trial development program ever. Torcetrapib/atorvastatin's clinical program will involve 25,000 patients at hundreds of medical centers worldwide at a cost of about $800 million.
"If we prove our hypothesis, torcetrapib/atorvastatin has the potential to benefit millions of lives around the world," said Dr. John L. LaMattina, president of Pfizer Global Research and Development. "Nothing is certain except our huge investment. Even if this fails as a new medicine, we will have advanced scientific understanding in this area."
Pfizer researchers began the torcetrapib/atorvastatin program more than 15 years ago, basing their HDL-raising approach on inhibiting CETP, a protein in the liver that transfers cholesterol. In 1990, The New England Journal of Medicine reported that a group of Japanese patients who were lacking the CETP protein had high HDL levels and a low incidence of coronary artery disease.
Pfizer chemists spent years trying to find a compound that could inhibit CETP. Preliminary work led them to their most promising compound -- CP- 529,414, now known as torcetrapib. Other Pfizer researchers then spent several more years improving the compound's physical properties and understanding how torcetrapib worked before it could be administered to people in 1999.
While torcetrapib alone was inadequate in lowering LDL -- with some patients even experiencing slight increases in LDL levels -- consultation with external experts confirmed that the compound should be used with atorvastatin, which has been widely studied and shown to be highly effective at reducing LDL levels.
Pfizer also developed a new dosage form technology called spray-dried dispersion (SDD) in collaboration with Bend Research, which is being used at Loughbeg. The plant in County Cork will use this new technology to manufacture the SDD component that ultimately is combined with Lipitor to formulate the torcetrapib/atorvastatin combination used in the clinical development program.
When the facility expansion is fully operational, it will require 40 employees, said Pfizer Global Manufacturing President Nat Ricciardi. "This is the type of major financial commitment Pfizer is willing to make on an entirely new and yet-to-be-approved medicine because it has potential to improve lives of people around the world," he said. "Having the operation up and running before our regulatory filings should facilitate the review process," Ricciardi said.
In addition to the SDD technology, the Loughbeg facility has the latest in process analytical technology, on-line sensing instruments, and a wide range of novel manufacturing technologies.
An official opening ceremony will be held at the facility on Friday, June 24. The event will be hosted by Nat Ricciardi and Michael Martin, Ireland's minister for enterprise, trade and employment.
Key torceptrapib/atorvastatin milestones:
1990 Scientific paper includes hypothesis about the benefits of HDL
elevation
1993 Pfizer identifies a promising compound that might have relevant
medicinal qualities
1994 Pfizer modifies chemical, now known as CP-529, 414, to improve
its activity
1995 Pfizer demonstrates its compound's activity in vivo (cell cultures
and animal models)
1996 Pfizer further modifies compound to improve in vivo activity
1999 First human trials demonstrate how CP-529,414 (torcetrapib) works
in the body
2000 Larger-scale, Phase II trials begin to further test safety and
efficacy
2003 $800 million Phase III trials begin to test the prospective
medicine's activity against disease
2004 Begin enrollment of the ILLUMINATE, morbidity/mortality clinical
trial
PFIZER DISCLOSURE NOTICE: The information contained in this release is as of June 22, 2005. Pfizer assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements contained in this release as the result of new information or future events or developments.
This release contains forward-looking information about a product candidate that involves substantial risks and uncertainties. Such risks and uncertainties include, among other things, the uncertainties inherent in research and development; decisions by regulatory authorities regarding whether and when to approve any drug applications that may be filed for the product candidate as well as their decisions regarding labeling and other matters that could affect its commercial potential; and competitive developments.
A further list and description of risks and uncertainties can be found in Pfizer's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 and in its reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K.
Source: Pfizer Inc
Hi Altarboy,
You can appeal a Final Rejection and for Efficient Methods and Apparatus for High-Throughput Processing of Gene Sequence Data
US: 09/964,059, there was a Final Rejection on 06-15-2005.
However, Compositions and Methods for Inferring a Response to Statin seems to be moving in the right direction and there was movement on 06-17-2005.
Hope this answers your question,
Big Blue
Bump #27967
New Information (Today) / Patent
As promised, I stated that I would update the board from time to time on DNAP Patent movement. By the term movement I mean that there has been another step initiated by DNAP or the US Patent Office. This movement may be a non-final rejection, final rejection, responses, forwarding information, etc. However, movement means that we are closer to the potential of getting a patent. I hope the board finds this information helpful.
Big Blue
Efficient Methods and Apparatus for High-Throughput Processing of Gene Sequence Data
US: 09/964,059; Movement on: 06-15-2005 (Final Rejection but can go through an appeal process)
Methods for the Identification of Genetic Features for Complex Genetics Classifiers
US: 10/120/804; Movement on: 05-04-2005
Compositions and Methods for Detecting Polymorphisms Associated with Pigmentation
US: 10/156,995; Movement on: 04-04-2005
Compositions and Methods for Inferring a Response to Statin
US: 10/188,359; Movement on: 06-17-2005 (as of right now this one looks the most promising to go through)
Perhaps someone can find it but I have not been able to find any proprietary products, patents, or revenue information. If this company is not going to at least pay for itself my already wary faith in DNAP is going to take a hit. To the point, ANY monies diverted away from the EPO project without at least generating the revenue needed to cover the expense hurts this company. If someone can find earnings info on Trace please post it. If not, please find out during the up coming meeting. If Trace is a cash flow drain this was a very VERY bad move. I am hopeful. Thank you,
Big Blue
As always, well stated Miss Scarlet (28166 I completely agree).
Big Blue
Thanks Miss Scarlet.
The other day you asked for a picture of a Mooney and I tried to post one but it would not take. I recall someone explaining how to do it (I think it was Chris) but I did not have time to search for the post nor have I had time to see if anyone did post the picture for you. I'm sorry I could not do it for you. Lately, I just have had less and less time to review the board.
Warmest regards,
Blue
Even With A Likely R/S Coming, The New & Main Reason Why I Continue to Hold DNAP IS....
exclusivity of the following and the slated event of production of GMP grade EPO dimers in 9 months.
Happy Father's Day (this is my 2nd official father's day),
Big Blue
US Patents:
1. US Patent Application Serial No. 08/890,929, issued 6/05/01, entitled “Production and use of Recombinant Protein Multimers with Increased Biological Activity”
2. US Patent Application Serial No. 6,187,564 CIP, issued 2/03/98, entitled “Production and use of Recombinant Protein Multimers with Increased Biological Activity”
Foreign Patents:
1. PCT/US98/13944(EPO, CA, AU, JP), filed 7/10/98, entitled “Production and use of Recombinant Protein Multimers with Increased Biological Activity”
Chemically Cross-Linked Dimers:
US Patents:
1. U.S. Patent Application Serial No.5,747,445, issued 5/05/98, entitled “Modified Polypeptides with Increased Biological Activity”
2. U.S. Patent Application Serial No.5,919,758, issued 7/06/99, entitled “Modified Polypeptides with Altered Biological Activity”
3. U.S. Patent Application Serial No.6,107,272, issued 8/22/00, entitled “Modified Polypeptides with Increased Biological Activity”
Foreign Patents:
1. PCT/US95/03242(EPO, AU, CA, JP), issued 3/15/95, entitled “Modified Polypeptides with Increased Biological Activity”
2. PCT/US97/22503(EPO, AU, CA, JP), pending, entitled “Modified Polypeptides with Increased Biological Activity”
Chris,
I COMPLETELY agree.
Big Blue
New Information (Today) / Patent
As promised, I stated that I would update the board from time to time on DNAP Patent movement. By the term movement I mean that there has been another step initiated by DNAP or the US Patent Office. This movement may be a non-final rejection, final rejection, responses, forwarding information, etc. However, movement means that we are closer to the potential of getting a patent. I hope the board finds this information helpful.
Big Blue
Efficient Methods and Apparatus for High-Throughput Processing of Gene Sequence Data
US: 09/964,059; Movement on: 06-15-2005 (Final Rejection but can go through an appeal process)
Methods for the Identification of Genetic Features for Complex Genetics Classifiers
US: 10/120/804; Movement on: 05-04-2005
Compositions and Methods for Detecting Polymorphisms Associated with Pigmentation
US: 10/156,995; Movement on: 04-04-2005
Compositions and Methods for Inferring a Response to Statin
US: 10/188,359; Movement on: 06-17-2005 (as of right now this one looks the most promising to go through)
OT: Altarboy,
Mooney's are GREAT single engine land planes. If you want to check out the company go to mooney.com .
Big Blue
Thanks FSail,
The Cherokee 180 wouldn't be bad but I have always had my heart set on a Mooney. The quest for a new Mooney is about #5 on my life-goals list that I hope to accomplish someday.
Thanks for the wish,
Big Blue
Altarboy,
I would love a Mooney!
You can buy one for me here: mooney.com
Thanks,
Big Blue
Welcome LG.
Big Blue
Hopeful,
Great find. Thanks for the information.
Big Blue (ILH/BO)
Full Disclosure
I would love to see full disclosure on this board.
I = investor
T= trader
L= long
S= short
B= buy
H= hold
S= sell
O= owner
N= non-owner
Big Blue (ILH/BO)
Unxcman,
I wish I was. I have too much going on with a young family. I am hopeful that in the years to come our investment will flourish and one of these years I will make it to the meeting and meet some of my DNAP IHUB brothers and sisters.
Warmest regards and wishes of a safe journey to all,
Big Blue
Hi Extreme,
I am not sure as to the date a proxyvote must be in by. I voted online through proxyvote.com with my notification in-hand from my brokerage house. If you elected to do vote by post it will likely take longer for you to get notification. I have seen posts from people with Ameritrade and Scottrade online accounts already got their posts. If you have an online account and normally vote online, I suggest that you contact your broker.
As to why people are voting already, I can only answer for myself and as I have noted before a r/s will currently do nothing for this company. 1) Even if the pps was 8.00 they would not be able to get on an exchange without an income variance. This would be HIGHLY unlikely. 2) A pop in the price from a pr, patent, purchase, etc would have to be so dramatic for the r/s to bring the price to 3 or 4 that that is also highly unlikely. A pps of 3 or 4 could get you on different exchanges but you still have the minimum income issue. 3) Since getting on an exchange is currently not an option at the currently income levels the only other reason for a r/s would be for greater volume produced buy institutional investors. There are many II that only look at a stock > $5. Since we would not see $5 with a r/s, a r/s split is not in the best interest of the shareholders because it will currently achieve nothing. 4)Lastly, as an owner in DNAP it would have been nice to know the exact reasoning for putting a r/s to vote. However, since the requirements of the different exchanges are what they are the only thing they could have produced that would have made me vote yes would have been a letter from an exchange giving them a pps and income variance.
Good luck and God bless,
Big Blue (Long-Investor in DNAP)
Bump. 26371
I, like many, have voted No on the R/S. Current funding for this company is fine for the short term. Releasing more shares into the market place (as needed) is a MUCH better option due to the FACT that the pps is so low. The only time I will ever vote for a r/s for this company or any other company is to get on an exchange or to get to a level (~>5.00) where more instituational investors look at you. As I have said before, for DNAP to get on a major exchange the r/s would have to get the price to 3 or 4 (depending on the exchange) due to minimum bid requirements and as of right now the minimum income requirements are too high for DNAP (this is a fact). My reasons are sound and factual to oppose the r/s. For those that are considering voting yes, please do some DD and ask the question WHY does the company want a r/s when it can not get us on an exchange. Please review this matter closely.
Good luck and God bless to all,
Big Blue (DNAP Long-Investor)
You don't have to yell at me. LOL! My question just wasn't for the r/s (as per your posts...we are on the same page here). Do you oppose all matters put to a vote? Thanks in advance.
Blue
Hi Frog,
If you do not mind, how did/will you vote? If you care to keep your vote private I understand.
Big Blue
Hi Doc.
I show the meeting being June 23.
Blue
Just got in from lots of yard work (my back is killing me) and read some of the best posts that I've seen on this board for sometime!
I, like many, have voted No on the R/S. Current funding for this company is fine for the short term. Releasing more shares into the market place (as needed) is a MUCH better option due to the FACT that the pps is so low. The only time I will ever vote for a r/s for this company or any other company is to get on an exchange or to get to a level (~>5.00) where more instituational investors look at you. As I have said before, for DNAP to get on a major exchange the r/s would have to get the price to 3 or 4 (depending on the exchange) due to minimum bid requirements and as of right now the minimum income requirements are too high for DNAP (this is a fact). My reasons are sound and factual to oppose the r/s. For those that are considering voting yes, please do some DD and ask the question WHY does the company want a r/s when it can not get us on an exchange. Please review this matter closely.
Good luck and God bless to all,
Big Blue (DNAP Long-Investor)
As I have stated before, I will likely vote no on the r/s.
Big Blue
Hi Frog,
As much as I would like to answer your questions to the “faithful longs”(fls), I do not include myself in that category. I am long. I am an investor in DNAP and understand the risks. I have watched for sometime out of interest in the technology but only started to invest late 04; therefore, it is likely that my dca on dnap is not as high as the fls.
With that being said, I have two comments I would like to address regarding your post, they are as follows:
You stated: People often want to talk about speculative possibilities based on their current enamoration with the latest news, I am curious as to their previous reactions to promises and claims that never materialized.
The history of DNAP includes a long long list of similar bursts of excitement based on reports and PR's that all just faded away. The list includes but is not limited to; The two million dollar GMED deal; The Orchid option (from 4 years ago); The Malaysian Grant; The collaboration with Asian companies (The leaked secret Web Pages were a riot); The Biofrontera Purchase; and last but not least the latest Beth Israel deal.
My Comment: The term similar bursts references the sentence prior that states promises and claims that never materialized. It is entirely too early to make this claim on the Beth Israel Agreement. You should not have included it in your list.
You stated: Why is there no apparent unrest among the faithful concerning the consistent failure of the company to finish anything they ever started? (Don't tell me about Ancestry and Witness as they didn't start them.)
My Comment: I can not address your question regarding unrest and with the latest SEC filing I would not expect unrest. I can address your statement of... consistent failure of the company to finish anything they ever started? The word anything makes your statement within your question wrong. DNAP continues to improve their Ancestry and Winess products, they added additional services that brought in improved revenues, they continue to work towards getting a patent(s), and they have finished Retinome. Lastly, starting something should be a prerequisite for finishing something in the landscape of business (as you statement alludes with your statement: Don’t tell me about Ancestry and Witness as they didn't start them.). With M&A you have the common practice of many companies reaping the benefits from other company inventions.
I don’t want anyone to think of me being rude so if anyone responds to this post, I probably will not be able to answer it until Wednesday.
Warm regards and God bless,
Big Blue
Hi Geo,
Please read posts 25438, 24154. If you have any questions regarding my position or the company after that I will be happy to try and aswer them the best I can on Tuesday.
Big Blue
Dear Frog,
I, as you know, completely agree with you regarding this statement:
On the other hand when someone shows up with seemingly unsupported claims and/or interpretations, it is only prudent to delve into those interpretations in order to discover their validity.
I think you add to this board and I for one would not want to see you go. Also, as far as putting up with you (another poster’s words) it is normally a pleasure to reading your posts. Simply put, an educated and civil dissenting voice in a crowd of optimists helps give us all a better perspective on this company.
Concerning the filing today and on one read, the results are what I expected as I stated in post #25963. I don’t recall your latest investing position on the company but I wish for us all to prosper.
Big Blue
All and All...
A fairly good report for DNAP.
Blue
Money,
This is from the Agreement:
Big Blue
SPECIFIC DUE DILIGENCE OBLIGATIONS
Prior to execution and delivery of this Agreement, Licensee shall produce a development and commercialization plan acceptable to Licensor. Such plan shall indicate (to the extent practicable and on a product-by-product basis, if appropriate) Licensee's currently expected research and development budget; regulatory approval, patent prosecution, marketing and manufacturing strategies; and expected sources of funding. In addition, Licensee shall adhere to the following diligence milestones:
Event: Date:
Production of GMP grade EPO dimers 03/2006
First commercial sale of a Licensed Product in Asia or S. America 12/2011
First commercial sale of Licensed Product in US/Western Europe 12/2012
Dear Jaber-Jaws & Others,
Concerning you comments regarding the next quarterly report, quarter revenues may be higher versus a year ago due to the fact of additional distributors, products, and services. In August 2004 DNAP added two products (Euro-DNA & Retinome). In July 2004 DNAP added their STRmap service. Lastly, within about the last year there are three new distributors (ReliaGene, Lynn Peavey, & ORCH). I do not expect the next report to show huge gains but one can reasonably surmise that with more products, services, and availability of their products that revenues will likely increase. As to the pps we will all have to wait and see.
Big Blue