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.
no bavi did better... just mos was not reached... just no continuity in the various trials... basically says bavi makes pd1 better... just need a more controlled trial... the p values would indicate they had enough samples according to my "Statistics for Dummies" book.
the real issue with respect to share price is institutional ownership.
i spoke with someone that has been in the institutional money management for decades and knows many portfolio managers (PM) and their analysts. he presented pphm to four different ones and they all came back with the same comments...
the BOD is a major red flag...
one PM said this...
"Where do you think their incentive lies - raise stock price or just keep raising equity to pay themselves? That would be a tough question for them to answer."
here's another excerpt from my contact...
"Finally, I also tried to get a close friend who is very experienced equity research analyst at a $60 billion pension fund to look at PPHM and as a favor to me he did some serious DD. He came back and said the science looks promising but the Board appears "way too shady" for them to put any money into it and warned me about not only their egregious compensation but also their backgrounds and terrible track record both at PPHM as well as their previous stints.
My guess is that a BP would have the same concerns handing over a bunch of money to what is basically a three person cartel.
Share price will not reach potential until the road blocks for institutional ownership are removed. So how serious is mgmt in righting the ship?
both novartis and merck have $174 bil mkt caps and are swimming in the same ponds...
i think they can pay a tad more...
enlarge it and read it... read the summary... and we trade down? with the car-t race in full swing and they can't do a deal? this has merck or novartis written all over it... with msk endorsement on top...
it seems the other biomarkers had more "sizzle"... with the whole picture be presented at asco? with the reason being if presented at aacr, would not be "new" at asco? just searching... the vienna data seemed much better...
also looks like preparing the microenvironment is the next big step..
http://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/full/10.2217/imt-2016-0125
notice the term "immunomodulatory agent" ..
seems to be associated with multiple myeloma so far
https://www.themmrf.org/multiple-myeloma-knowledge-center/myeloma-drugs-guide/drug-classifications/novel-agents/
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/779560
http://www.researchoncology.com/platforms-and-pipeline/centers-of-excellence/immuno-oncology/immunomodulatory-agents-imid/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16085014
and celgene seems to have a focus on this area... so they would know the in's and out's of the tumor micro-environment and who's got what and whether it's worth something..
http://www.researchoncology.com/platforms-and-pipeline/centers-of-excellence/immuno-oncology/immunomodulatory-agents-imid/
follow the twitter trail
https://twitter.com/sloan_kettering
Preview what’s coming at #AACR17 from Parker Institute scientists @MDAndersonNews @sloan_kettering @PennCancer http://bit.ly/2nO56mX
http://www.parkerici.org/media/2017/parker-institute-for-cancer-immunotherapy-scientists-to-present-research-on?utm_content=buffere296a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Other adoptive cell therapy abstracts of interest:
• Targeting phosphatidylserine in combination with adoptive T cell transfer eliminates advanced tumors without off-target toxicities in a melanoma preclinical model
The principal investigator is Taha Merghoub, PhD, Parker Institute member researcher at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Co-authors include Parker Institute Center Director Jedd Wolchok, MD, PhD, at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
i think we can expect some very positive changes... the gravy train will be derailed..
"If the EGO's of some of the PPHM BoD members can be tuned to accept a new allie and, OK after haveing all the needed warranties that there is no snake hidden in the grass, and extend the BoD then IMO this would be a GOOD thing for PPHM."
Stafford helped build XENCOR with an absolute stellar BOD. If you took the biotech experience of ES, DP and CJ and added it all up, the sum would not even come close to one board member of Xencor... and Xencor board pay averages $40k in fees
http://investors.xencor.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1558370-16-4914&CIK=1326732
so why would they have any EGO? i can just imagine the conversation.."we ran three companies into the ground taking excessive fees until they bled to death... so top that Stafford"... "we know how to keep shareholders from trying to make the company a better company" ... "we pay ourselves $320,000 in fees, more than the vast majority of fortune 100 companies" ... "how are you going to make it better stafford?"....
the market is waiting for adult supervision...
agree... the problems are very evident and very fixable... when the problem is the problem and the only way to fix the problem is removing the problem and when each problem makes $320,000 a year in fees, the problem won't take care of the problem... an outside force is required..
when you have a roach problem, you need an exterminator.... hopefully ronin is the exterminator...
massive dilution, delisting issue, DS, selling shares way below paid in capital per share..
the proof is in the pudding...
Mgmt could put Stafford on the BOD today... nothing is stopping them..
several problems go away... including the $320,000 in fees...
yes.. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that the more institutions play the better the share price... i would rather have one institution stroke a $15 mil check than 1000 retail investors each buying 1000 shares...
Nasdaq knows this and mgmt knows this... i got an email some time ago from IR stating their goal was to increase institutional ownership...
so part of the plan for nasdaq would be to improve the Qualityscore..
https://www.issgovernance.com/solutions/iss-analytics/qualityscore/
Corporate Governance
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s ISS Governance QualityScore as of March 2, 2017 is 8. The pillar scores are Audit: 2; Board: 8; Shareholder Rights: 7; Compensation: 8.
Corporate governance scores courtesy of Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS). Scores indicate decile rank relative to index or region. A decile score of 1 indicates lower governance risk, while a 10 indicates higher governance risk.
http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PPHM/profile?p=PPHM
So the question is whether they are really serious about making the necessary changes to improve the company...
the real goal should be removing/fixing the problems so institutional investors will invest... the $1 sp target should not be the goal... fix the problems and the share price should take care of itself..
yes change must come from within... if PPHM doesn't make changes to obvious problems with obvious solutions, then nasdaq can say no...
the question is why they have not made obvious needed changes..
this picture and $320,000 a year in fees should give you a pretty good answer...
http://ir.peregrineinc.com/committees.cfm
keep in mind stafford was paid $35k in fees while the BOD of Xencor was paid an avg of $40k in fees...
grab the pitch forks and let your voices be heard... mgmt could solve the problem today by inviting stafford to the BOD...
https://listingcenter.nasdaq.com/Show_Doc.aspx?File=lq_contacts.html
Dear Nasdaq:
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals (PPHM) will soon be appearing before you to request an additional extension. I am a shareholder and would hope that you would grant the extension under the condition that PPHM take steps to improve the Board of Directors for the following reasons:
The Board
The BOD is comprised of four members: President/CEO, Mr. Steve King, who is involved with day to day operations. The other three members include the COB, Carlton Johnson, and Directors Eric Swartz and David Pohl. Based on an analysis of a biotech peer group of over 100 companies, the average number of board members was 7.54 with a standard deviation of 1.42. The PPHM BOD is 2.4 times the standard dev and when combined with the factors listed below creates capital flow restrictions (i.e. red flags). The following analysis pertains to the three outside directors(OD) and given the majority the outside directors have, they steer and control the BOD. Here is a summary of “The Lackeys”.
Lack Of Independence
The OD are all related through previous work relationships. Eric Swartz was President of Roswell Capital and Carlton Johnson was attorney at Roswell Capital. All three directors were directors/presidents of Patriot Scientific Corporation at one time. No real outside independence… more like cronies or pals.
Lack Of Oversight
Below is committee roster from the company website. A picture’s worth a thousand words. Given they pay themselves and average of $320,000 in annual fees not counting stock option awards, a small close related BOD is a good thing (for Board Members).
http://ir.peregrineinc.com/committees.cfm
Lack of Biotech Experience
Biotech, given the complexity, one would think having board members with industry experience would be a good thing. What I can gather, there is really no biotech experience on the BOD. There is really no excuse for the lack of experience on the BOD.
Lack of Institutional Approval/Support
Last time I checked, ISS rates the company the lowest rating possible and many red flags. The problems with the BOD are fixable by the BOD. But why would they want to upset the status quo? Many shareholders have tried for many years to get the BOD improved. Institutions pay attention to ratings and avoid red flags. We all know the impact of institutional investment support.
In closing, please help my beloved PPHM find the love within the investment community. Institutional support will solve many of the listing requirement problems. Unfortunately, PPHM mgmt has failed to see the solutions are within their own grasp. Please help them find their way. That will require adult supervision and Nasdaq has that power.
Thank You,
the "market" and the real market movers are the institutions... as for the ship coming in, those ships won't enter the harbor until it's safe... right now all the red flags from ISS say stay away...
and when you manage other peoples money, one tends to heed the warnings..
https://www.issgovernance.com/
https://www.issgovernance.com/solutions/iss-analytics/qualityscore/
all the problems are fixable by management... and they have known about the problems for years....
“Refreshment” is among the most hotly-debated topics across U.S. boardrooms and within the broader corporate governance community. While shareholders, directors, and other market constituents vary as to the reasons for their refreshment concerns, they typically include snail-paced board turnover, sky-rocketing tenures, stagnant skillsets, and deficient diversity.
thinking out loud here...
i think adding a qualified BOD member would assist in making the case for any extension... i will save a few paragraphs of discussion as to why it would help share price for now...
ask pphm mgmt to affirm that a BOD member would be added... if no affirmation or refusal, the shareholders communicate with nasdaq and ask that a new BOD member be a requirement of extension ....all at the request of shareholders... with the reasons why such as DS, performance, experience and the relationships (all on all same committees)
basically fix the obvious... or we'll ask the principal or city hall if you will, make pphm fix it....
and the solution is readily available.. an invitation to stafford and hopefully one more... or a shotgun wedding... mgmt's choice
and yes N4K... until the problem is fixed, i will keep trying to fix it...
i did not get a chance to gaze into those eyes...
the science side is good... the mgmt side is not... the share price will not increase to its optimal level (one where the influence of red flags prevents participants from entering arena) until the issues that prevent the potential participants are removed... issues related to the BOD...
mgmt has the keys to unlocking this problem...
unfortunately mgmt's best economic alternative is to take the enormous fees and get more and more lottery tickets paid for by the shareholders... if you are on that team, why would you want change?
yes early stage immunotherapy... what works.. why... how ... which patients... knowledge changes daily... have better combos surfaced ... side effects...
so i prefer bailing out early and not wasting time and money...
the real issue before us is whether mgmt is serious about unleashing the value which will require removing the chains that are keeping value down...
the most obvious way is to increase institutional ownership... an improvement of the bod (preferably replacement) would go a long way in removing some very heavy chains.... look up ISS... per last check PPHM had the lowest score possible...
https://www.issgovernance.com/
now if one is an institutional investor with fiduciary obligations of due diligence, one would be considered unwise to invest in a high risk biz such as biotech where even the best intentions and science can go wrong, and a major problem is identified...why start out of the blocks with a major red flag, the BOD, that is easily fixable and controllable by the very folks that have the red flags planted on their backs in full view .... that points to a big problem such as either gross unethical management (in essence planting both feet at the edge of impropriety while flipping the bird to shareholders) or basic lack of common sense... either one is a problem and combined and we have own own immuno disease (not therapy) ... a BOD immune to oversite and consequences... basically parasites (some would argue they do some good ..just like the birds hanging out by the rhinos butthole)... and the best solution is surgery (preferable) or with another intervention such as a better drug (qualified BOD member) along with monitoring (another BOD member)
i have very good source that told me a biotech fund would not invest in pphm due to the BOD...multiplied many times as institutions due the same type of DD (reading ISS reports and ratings), this has a huge impact on share price and share price stability....
so folks, the jig is up, the gravy train must end but you as shareholders need to communicate and demand better...i have worked every channel i can to shine a light on this BS (thru contacts at UT, UTSW, DS lawyers, institutional investors via contacts).... and hopefully impact change...
please do as well...
agree... maybe stanford and son get the ball moving...
as i shared earlier i worked for a very wealthy family and one of the trustees for one of the trusts described the president of the division i worked in like this... "if he walked into a two hole outhouse, he'd crap his pants" ... sometimes you got a pick a horse and ride it...
keep in mind azn bought two facilities in co ...
http://www.denverpost.com/2015/09/11/astrazeneca-buys-former-amgen-facility-in-boulder/
http://www.denverpost.com/2016/10/10/astrazeneca-purchases-amgens-longmont-campus/
avid wants to expand and azn wants to expand pipeline..
duh... how hard would it be to put the deal together?
and the AZN plan doesn't preclude other plans as well... in devember i met a nurse that works in the mgmt of clinical trials for a major BP... i asked her about immunotherapy... she was very involved.. asked her if she heard of bavi... yes... and she said it was very important to get the immune system working for the immunotherapy drugs to work... she has worked in the mgmt of clinical trials for thirty years...
the best thing that could happen is stafford joins BOD and the sooner the better... the weak link right now is the perception and black clouds... that would be a ray of sunshine and we all know sunshine is the best disinfectant...
a money partnership that puts the IP in the fast lane and provides cash for two or three avid expansions with geographical diversity solves many problems...
MH thanks.. on the real estate side housing all the equipment, a landlord would not sign a long term lease without adequate assurances that the rent will be paid.. so a long term contract in hand would have been needed for the expansion imo because the current financial shape ie delist issue and cash situation would have been a tough sell... and landlords need to get leases approved by their lenders and lenders really drill down and look at credit risk...
another reason for the massive dilution could have been to secure letters of credit (money in the bank) for rent and equipment... for a tenant like PPHM, one might require an LOC that covers two years (or more) of rent, leasing commisions, tenant improvements etc...
all good candidates... and the pphm BOD fits right in...
i agree on the difficulty in deciding... like who is the worst serial killer in history... so many parameters...
the "find a worse BOD in biotech" challenge is still on.. can you find one? i doubt it...
i believe stafford was an original investor in xencor and per last filing owned over 7 mil shares... and per a xencor pr, stafford helped build a stellar BOD... and one that takes an avg of $40k in fees...
now compare the xencor bod and pphm bod... so would you rather have ES running the self serving fee grabbing BOD or someone like stafford?
http://investors.xencor.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=949693
Bruce L.A. Carter, Ph.D. has served as a member of our Board of Directors since September 2009, and was appointed Chairman of the Board in December 2009. Since November 2013, Dr. Carter has served as a director of Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a publicly-held biopharmaceutical company. From June 2012 until November 2015, Dr. Carter served as a director of Regulus Therapeutics Inc., a publicly-held biopharmaceutical company. From November 2009 until May 2011, Dr. Carter served as Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors of Immune Design Corp., a privately-held biotechnology company, and as Chairman of its Board of Directors until February 2012, and served as an independent director until 2015. Since June 2008, he has served as a director of Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited, a publicly-held pharmaceutical company. From April 1998 to January 2009, Dr. Carter served as Chief Executive Officer of ZymoGenetics, Inc., a publicly-held biotechnology company (acquired by Bristol-Myers Squibb in October 2010). Dr. Carter holds a Ph.D. in Microbiology from Queen Elizabeth College, University of London and a B.Sc. with Honors in Botany from the University of Nottingham, England. We believe that Dr. Carter's experience as an executive and his breadth of knowledge and valuable understanding of the pharmaceutical industry qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.
Robert F. Baltera, Jr . joined our Board of Directors in November 2013. Since January 2016, Mr. Baltera has served as an entrepreneur-in-residence at the venture capital firm of Frazier Healthcare Partners and is chief executive officer of Hawkeye Therapeutics, a company funded by Frazier Healthcare. From February 2015 until December 2015, he served as Chief Executive Officer and a member of the board of directors of Laguna Pharmaceuticals, a private biopharmaceutical company. Mr. Baltera was the Chief Executive Officer of Amira Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a private pharmaceutical development company, a position he held from July 2007 through September 2011. Amira was sold to Bristol-Myers Squibb in September 2011. Before becoming Amira's Chief Executive Officer, he held a number of senior management positions at Amgen Inc., a publicly-held biopharmaceutical company, the last being Vice President of Corporate and Contract Manufacturing. He served as Amgen's team leader responsible for the approval of Kineret® in rheumatoid arthritis. Mr. Baltera previously served as Executive Chairman of Adheron Therapeutics (formerly Synovex Inc.), a private biotechnology company, and on the board of directors of Organovo Holdings, Inc., a publicly-held biotechnology development company, which was sold to Roche Holding AG in 2015, and on the following private companies: Arcturus Therapeutics, Inc., AdheronTherapeutics, Panmira Pharmaceuticals, LLC, FLAP, LLC, and Ruga Corporation, as well as an industry group, the San Diego Venture Group. Mr. Baltera holds an M.B.A. from the Anderson School at the University of California, Los Angeles and earned a B.S. in Microbiology and an M.S. in Genetics from the Pennsylvania State University. Mr. Baltera attended the Director Education and Certification program at the University of California, Los Angeles. We believe that Mr. Baltera's previous executive leadership and product development experience, as well as his educational background qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.
Bassil I. Dahiyat, Ph.D. has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since February 2005 and as a member of our Board of Directors since August 1997. Dr. Dahiyat co-founded Xencor in 1997 and, from 1997 to 2003, served as our Chief Executive Officer and, from 2003 to 2005, served as our Chief Scientific Officer. In 2005, Dr. Dahiyat was recognized as a technology pioneer by the World Economic Forum. Additionally, Dr. Dahiyat was named one of 2003's Top 100 Young Innovators by MIT's Technology Review magazine for his work on protein design and its development for therapeutic applications and has received awards from the American Chemical Society, the Controlled Release Society and the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Dahiyat holds a Ph.D. in Chemistry from the California Institute of Technology and B.S. and M.S.E. degrees in Biomedical Engineering from Johns Hopkins University. We believe Dr. Dahiyat's experience in the pharmaceutical industry and as one of our founders qualifies him to serve on our Board of Directors.
Kurt Gustafson joined our Board of Directors in July 2014. He has more than 25 years of diverse experience in corporate finance, with 15 years in senior management roles leading the finance departments of multi-faceted, dynamic and growth oriented biopharmaceutical industry organizations. Currently, Mr. Gustafson serves as Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer at Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a position he has held since June 2013. From April 2009 to June 2013, he served as Chief Financial Officer at Halozyme Therapeutics, Inc., a publicly-traded biopharmaceutical company. Before Halozyme, Mr. Gustafson worked at Amgen, Inc. for over 18 years holding various positions in finance including Treasurer, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Amgen International based in Switzerland. Mr. Gustafson holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in accounting from North Park University in Chicago and an M.B.A. from University of California, Los Angeles. We believe Mr. Gustafson’s experience in biotechnology company leadership and finance and his educational background qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.
Yujiro S. Hata joined the Board of Directors in July 2015. He has more than 20 years of biotechnology company experience. Since August 2015 he has served as co-founder, Chief Executive Officer and member of the board of directors of IDEAYA Bioscienses, a private oncology company. In 2015 Mr. Hata served as chief operating officer at immuno oncology company FLX Bio, where he oversaw all business operations, mergers and acquisitions, and licensing. Prior to that Mr. Hata served as chief operating officer at immuno-oncology companies, Flexus Biosciences and spinout FLX Bio, until Flexus Biosciences’ acquisition by Bristol-Meyers Squibb in April 2015. From 2010 until its acquisition by Amgen in October 2013, Mr. Hata was Vice President, Corporate Development and Strategy at Onyx Pharmaceuticals, where he held various leadership roles, including head of mergers and acquisitions, and licensing, and head of corporate strategy and strategic asset management. From 2002 to 2010, he served in various roles as Vice President, Senior Vice President, and Chief Business Officer at Enanta Pharmaceuticals, and earlier in his career served in business and corporate development roles at Genome Therapeutics Corporation, McKinsey and Company and ImClone Systems Incorporated. Mr. Hata obtained his MBA at Wharton as a Henry J. Kaiser recipient and completed undergraduate studies in Chemistry at Oxford University and Colorado College. Mr. Hata serves on the board of visitors of the Moores Cancer Center, at the University of California, San Diego. We believe that Mr. Hata’s experience in biotechnology company leadership and his background in strategy, corporate development and biotechnology company transactions qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.
A. Bruce Montgomery, M.D. joined our Board of Directors in March 2015. Dr. Montgomery has more than 25 years of drug development, operations and financing experience, including positions at Genentech, Inc., Pathogenesis Corporation, Corus Pharma, and Gilead Sciences, Inc. Since May 2011, he has been Chief Executive Officer and member of the board of Cardeas Pharma, a company he founded in 2010. From August 2006 to May 2011, Dr. Montgomery served as Senior Vice President of Gilead Sciences, Inc. and prior to that, served for six years as Chief Executive Officer of Corus Pharma, a specialized biotechnology company that he founded, which was acquired by Gilead in 2006. While at Gilead, Dr. Montgomery successfully led the development of Cayston (aztreonam) as a treatment for cystic fibrosis patients. Dr. Montgomery also served as Executive Vice President of Research and Development at PathoGenesis Corporation until its acquisition by Chiron Corporation in 2000. He has served as a board member for ZymoGenetics, Inc. and is currently on the board of Alder Biopharmaceuticals and Cytodyn, Inc. Dr. Montgomery is a board certified internist and pulmonologist. Dr. Montgomery received his B.S. in Chemistry (Magna cum Laude, Outstanding Chemistry Major (Merck Award)), and M.D. (Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society) from the University of Washington, Seattle. We believe that Dr. Montgomery’s executive leadership experience in pharmaceutical and biotechnology company drug development and his educational background qualify him to serve on our Board of Directors.
or better yet... add stafford and carter to the BOD and have two of the clowns step down.... that would boost the share price and signal to the institutions that it is now safe to invest...
xencor has partnerships with novartis, amgen, merck and others...
so they have back channels... so yes..
what we do know is the bod takes care of themselves before shareholders...
exhibit A is the fees.... and all the talks about "holding out" for us rights when they have been diluting for 20 cents on the dollar... we would have never heard of what was on the table and the BOD would not want the gravy train derailed...
now ronin has skin in the game and feedback from both sides of the table...
pphm mgmt now has to REPRESENT shareholders...
long overdue and mgmt put themselves in the position after many, many shareholders requested improving the bod over many, many years...
and basically mgmt told shareholders to take a hike while they took fees five to ten times the norm...
stafford took $35k in fees while on the xencor bod and the avg fees paid to xencor bod members was $40k vs PPHm bod taking avg $320k...
and if you added up all the experience of the entire PPHM bod (less SK), it would maybe get close to one xencor board member as far as biotech experience goes...
the connection was posted earlier...
http://investors.xencor.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=805963
Monrovia, CA – October 19, 2006 – Xencor, a company developing protein and antibody therapeutics, today announced that it raised $45 million in a private financing led by MedImmune Ventures, Inc., and including new investors Novo Nordisk and HealthCare Ventures as well as existing investor Zen Investments.
Stafford was founder of Zen Investments
so thru xencor, stafford has access to the following companies including AZN thru medimmune...
http://xencor.com/about-us/#partnering
the plot thickens
the one thing we do know is pphm mgmt puts their interests above shareholders... that you cannot argue...
great find...thanks eom.
The Dump...
In my area we have a local furniture store called "The Dump" that is always advertising that they received a shipment of mattresses, oriental rugs, you name it... they advertise and try to drive value for their goods. Does anyone recall mgmt doing anything to try to get value for the shares over the last two months? Or was it hush, hush as in no, no not him kind of quiet...
I can see the need to raise cash but to keep all things quiet while dumping those shares is a major breach of fiduciary responsibility imo. Even the car dealers advertise they must move some cars.
What we have just been a victim of what is akin to the car sales manager "quietly" selling $55,000 corvettes (in mgmt's own description I might add) for $25,000 a pop thru the "Shhh Keep It Quiet" sales campaign (only those that got the secret flyer and have the password get to partake). No exosomes excitement, no nothing... sorry but dilution hurts shareholders and dilution with no effort to get value hurts shareholders even more.... maybe senior mgmt will make it whole by not partaking in their portion of the 10 mil options awaiting their greedy self serving hands...
Ahh my second cup of coffee is so good... off to "The Dump"...
update.... used corn for sale... must sell immediately...
several scenarios why and how ronin arrived at the scene...
they all point to a changing of the guard at the bod... just one member outside the ES club will keep the entire crew walking the straight and narrow..
one thought i have is maybe a particular bp is having trouble communicating w/ pphm on what a great partner they would make and pphm insists on keeping the BOD intact and doing it their way which is plausible.. who in their right mind would want that gravy train derailed? who in their right mind would want the "slow play keep the IP under the radar IST option granting wealth transfer plan" to go away...
(years ago i had a client that would not sell his buildings even though every metric said sell.. he didn't... why? he was taking $500k a year in fees when he should have been taking maybe $100k... the fees were clouding his judgement... and the market changed and he lost a big tenant and lost the biggest building in foreclosure... but he still made the most money with his fees)
so maybe BP wants a deal but with a legit bod and better leadership and ronin appears at the request of a BP...and now someone would know what's going on given the relationships... and if pphm insists on working a deal that might be beneficial to the BOD but not necessarily the shareholders, a large shareholder would have a real beef and the wherewithal to do something about it.... so now mgmt has to keep the ball in the fairway... so sad..
so ronin could be acting w/ a BP, they could be acting on their own or they could be working with pphm... any one of those scenarios point to a better bod and better outcomes because no way ronin would allow the current bod situation or the tech to sit on the shelf while the immuno arms race is in full gear... eventually we will get an efficient market... but only after the inefficiencies are removed...
yes a great plan.. the arms race is on where BP and many others are spending billions trying to find the right combos and PPHM can brag how they are in slow play mode and sell share for 20 cents on the dollar...
the quicker someone like ronin can come in and clean house the better..
i've had a few conversations w/ the DS attorney... they deal in corporate malfeasance all day long... that is their profession... a shared opinion is we are dealing with some "very bad actors"...
pphm mgmt has had years to improve the BOD... they have entrenched themselves to protect the absurd fees they pay themselves with no oversight and poor performance...
look at the xencor board ... they get paid an average of $40k vs $320k for the three pphm bod members... why would they want to change that?
http://investors.xencor.com/directors.cfm
here's what good companies do...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/kite-announces-appointment-renowned-cancer-123000097.html
10 mil options.eom