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 don't know how many employees they have there, but at that burn rate, and the fact they are doing absolutely nothing themselves, they should lay at least another 50% of their employees off.
How many people does it take to hand trials off to investigators, as well as not doing any more drug development internally?
Kind of absurd. Great gig at some of these companies if you can land an executive slot.
Meanwhile:
I really hate that I get involved in companies with lousy management; I don't know if that's what I got with this Geron, but it's moving in that direction.
I suppose its a good thing they are letting others do the exploratory trials on their own dime (and not GERN's), however, this calls into the question some analysts brought up on the call: so, what exactly are these guys getting paid several hundreds of thousands of dollars in salaries to do, for the next 12 months?
ARQL: Caravon, did you see they just extended Pucci's contract out to 2017 ?
That's fantastic corporate governance for you.
I own ARQL.
At this point, any price will suffice !
Both Yervoy and BMS' anti-PD-1 compounds came from Medarex.
The PD1 drugs will be the biggest blockbusters to come to oncology, perhaps ever.
I think the only criticism one can lay on Medarex management right now is that they sold out for a terribly low price considering the value PD1 will have in the future (although, shareholders made out well back then, I would assume...just not as much as they could have had they not sold the company)
CLDX / Medarex
ARQL is a perfect example of a company that potentially has a good drug but has been screwed up badly by arrogant, buffoonery management/CEO and a partner with little experience in oncology drug development. Those two combinations are never a good thing - unless you just have a stroke of good luck following you.
So many of their trials are run on this old school chemotherapy "all comers" design, simply ignoring the new paradigm of personalized medicine. Given that c-Met is specific, if they even think about running future trials without a diagnostic or highly selected group, there is no reason to own ARQL, unless you like your chances as gambling. I really dont know if past trials designs were done as they were out of pure stupidity, laziness, arrogance, or greed...who knows.
Maybe shareholders will be lucky and someone will just buy these guys.
---- BTW, are you going to their Annual Shareholder Meeting? I think I might go; I want to ask Pucci some questions in front of the Board.
He's a crappy chemotherapy company CEO is what he is.
I was under the impression that they exercised their options due to the asteroid that passed by the Earth not too long ago; in the event that it hit.
INCY
I agree with the PC results; to me its pretty clear the drug is having a dramatic effect on bone mets.
I just cannot for the life of me figure out where the hell their cash goes? And then there are other companies who seem to spend 1/10th of their spend and seem to progress more.
Its like their CEO/CFO think this is AMGEN...By looking at their pictures of their HQ, I think they think they are AMGN.
It is disgusting how much money this company burns.
Drug development is expensive, but their expenses are just absurd. They simply do not care.
EXEL
Somewhat promising for ARQL is that a few very good life sciences/healthcare funds opened positions (or added) in the name last quarter.
Wellbutrin, because it is not an SSRI.
SSRIs as a class, have this effect. Lexapro, Paxil, Prozac....
Perhaps some of the newer drugs have less of an effect, but, I doubt it. Dont buy the "it will wear off in a few weeks" bit. I was on Paxil for months, and trust me, it didnt wear off. The only time it went away, was when i went on a drug holiday.
Pualo Pucci's interesting data:
They found it worked extremely well in patients who had medium levels of c-Met, who were right handed, drove a Toyota, caucasian with blue green eyes, and were between 150-170 lbs.
ARQL
Let's hope this offering doesnt suck all the natural buyers out of the market now :)
I think this is really positive, nonetheless. Hopefully this creates a nice floor at these levels, rather than a ceiling.
CLDX
Look at what all the partnerships have done for ARRY - absolutely nothing but give ARRY cash; in fact, I think all the partnerships have hurt ARRYs stock in terms of essentially wiping out any takeover premium.
I am glad Celldex is deciding to start a pivotal trial without a partner. They will be able to retain ownership of the asset, and also not get held back by some pharma that will likely move at stall speed, going through blue-ribbon multi-level executive meetings for a year deciding on how to run a trial.
$CLDX, from the 8-K
From ARRY today:
There's 3 Anti-PD-1s out there now that I know of: Genentech, BMS, and Merck.
Other than the partners of BMS, are we aware of any small-cap out there that has anti-PD-1 in their pipelines?
It's being hyped on the antisense and RNAi technology. I have no idea what the real value of the company is - they certainly have a lot going on though. Definitely not a one hit wonder.
$CYTK
This relates directly to tirasemtiv:
I don't know about that.
There are a lot of examples of where KOLs are representative of outcomes. For instance, if you can get a vibe from the KOLs about what trials are exciting and which experimental drugs are being more enrolled rapidly, I think you can extrapolate that they (KOLs and physicians) are seeing promising results and want their patients enrolled. I think you can also assume that if docs aren't interested in having their patients enrolled in a trial, it's probably because others docs have seen limited results of efficacy and there are other more promising trials instead.
If she is getting "clued in" by KOLs on what appears to be working, and what appears not to be working in clinical trials, I'll take her word for it any day over what statistics might say, or what previous data might have said.
The IMS numbers have been extremely accurate for tracking Erivedge and Kyprolis.
FWIW, if you have a Bloomberg terminal, all those numbers are available on a weekly and monthly basis.
Ask Sally about cMet and CRC. She believes, from my recollection, that cMet plays almost no role in this setting, as KRAS is driving it.
These guys aren't the best managers, not even close.
Stimuvax isn't even in their hands anymore, and ONT-10 in a tiny trial. They should be more aggressive with this Bcl compound.
I dont even know if they talk about this compound in their presentations.
This must be the date Novartis is going to close on buying the company for nothing less than the poison pill, right? I bet Berger did this offering just so Novartis would be more enticed to pay $65.00 for a company with an extra $300 million in fresh cash, no?
:o)
:o)
:o)
CELG and CELGZ barely moved today, so, all the hubbaloo from some about it not being good enough etc., was clearly incorrect.
And, as a very smart person reminded me, we still have a breakdown of the SPARC sets to look at.
I suspect there will be a very nice looking dataset in these patients.
Are there a lot of people that are actually saying this data is poor?
(people with any real credibility other than day swingers who think they can get rich on buying 200 shares of a stock)
Did you know this is being presented this week at ASCO GI?
Yea, the valuation is certainly low, thats for sure.
Maybe they will simply get lucky with their FGFR inhibitor. Ariad's ponatinib is beginning a trial in squamous cell lung cancer being run by docs at Dana Farber shortly (as you know, Dana Farber aint no joke). There is a rationale for FGFR in this indication. Can someone email or call that moron Pucci at ArQule so he doesn't enroll every other cancer indication EXCEPT that of squamous cell lung cancer????
Who is running the show in regard to development of tivantinib and the trials?
Is it ARQL or is it Daiichi? If it's ARQL, the Board should fire the CEO because there have just been way too many stupid mistakes which cost significant time and money (yes, it is the CEOs fault, can't blame the scientists....unless, of course, the drug isn't even a c-met, but some sort of inhibitor that just happens to hit Met in some respect).
If it's Daiichi....well, Daiichi is a cardio company with little if any experience in oncology development except for their recent buy-in of the space with Plexxikon. So, their development of oncology products is pretty much at zero, so to speak. Awful partner choice by Arqule, but, then again, maybe it was their ONLY choice.
Maybe they'll just get lucky one of these times...
It is pretty clear at this point that both Daiichi and Arqule have been pretty incompetent in oncology trial development thus far.
Nothing like trial and error....