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.
Always a pleasure. Knowing you, I'm sure you will review at least all the articles as part of your DD.
Seel, I just needed to know you were a buyer! Also, the offering gave me a chance to get in at $1.01. The combo = no brainer. Steve
P.S. Yes, I did my reading too. Convinced me it was worth the risk.
Hi NR,
I've been in this since it was under 4 and at the peak at 12+. As you know, I don't flip most stocks and I hold long-term. Still hold every share I ever bought, including those I received in the takeover of Prolor, from whence the long-acting clotting factor came (and a long acting HGH, etc.).
It's been subject to quite a few bashing articles, attacking it largely for having very few products actually in the market, no assurance they will come to market, delays in the process for some key products and a super high or negative PE. Most bashers even admit they are short. No surprise there.
A bunch of key products are capable of catapulting OPK upward - even if they are not yet on the market - and many holders are dedicated followers of Phillip Frost and focus on his past ability to make gobs of money.
Huge short holdings (haven't checked lately) offer potential short squeezes, as has happened in the past.
My current PT is $12. I think many here would give you a higher number.
Steve
From a SA news summary email I just received:
"Analysts chime in on InterMune • 3:34 PM
Maintaining a Neutral rating while raising the price target to $40, Goldman's Terence Flynn says yesterday's trial results should support U.S. approval in Q2 of 2015. He's raising the probability of approval to 100% from 30% and raising his estimate of peak market share to 50% from 30%, but not changing pricing or compliance assumptions. "We expect complete data to be presented at the ATS conference in May, where we also hope to gain insight on the competitive landscape with the potential presentation of Ph3 data from Boehringer Ingelheim's BIBF-1120."
Not convinced sales will be as large as the market is currently pricing in, Jefferies' Eun Yang maintains his Underperform rating while lifting the price target to $20. "Our new $20 PT is based on U.S./EU peak sales estimates of $650M/$300M, not a conservative assumption in our view."
Its work here done, Leerink Swan removes its Buy rating on the stock.
ITMN is giving back just a bit of yesterday's moonshot, -12.7% to $32.99."
Way to go Seel.
I believe the company PR said they would apply to the FDA sometime in 3Q2014.
Clearly it's going against my directional call, which was based on my gut anyway. It clearly will be a benefit to society, or at least the narrow segment of people with mid to moderate IPF. Keep holding!
GHMM,
I agree that it SHOULD be a slam dunk FDA approval and feel the US market will likely see slightly higher net product prices per patient-year. The 7 and 10 year exclusivity should be a sufficient time horizon.
However, I succumbed to temptation and sold my shares this morning, remembering how I didn't sell when the Europeans approved Esbriet shortly after the FDA denied approval. Kicked myself frequently as the shares dropped subsequently.
I do expect the price to drop to at least 30 and possibly to 25, when people start focusing on the timeline before FDA approval (application in the 3Q2014). I plan on buying back in, a luxury afforded by trading in a Roth account, although I too am typically a holder long-term.
I hope your forecast is accurate long-term and that mine is accurate short-term.
Steve
GHMM,
Yes, read the news and am happy I'm still long as well. Are you going to sell on the pop? Holding thru FDA approval? Or holding long term? GLTU!
Steve
Raw,
Yes, I have been arrogant myself, convinced that some great stock gain was due to my own brilliance, rather than dumb luck. Usually worked out that I would shoot myself in the foot by holding too long because I was greedy and convinced that a stock's upward trajectory would continue indefinitely. Or I would get too fancy in my strategy back when I did options [I was selling options before there was a CBOE and you had to negotiate terms and prices on each option] and when I was doing arbitrage.
But I'm holding my "free" $INO shares for the long haul - assuming our CEO keeps up his good work and that any setbacks (there almost inevitably will be some) will be minor.
Steve
I certainly hope that the bulk of my shares, which I continue to hold, will do well and that I have ample opportunity to regret having sold those I did. Meanwhile, given that they were in a Roth, I have taken my basis off the table and am playing with essentially "free" shares.
IInvestor,
I certainly admit I am the master of none! In fact, my wife would tell you I know absolutely nothing about anything.
Seriously, I read the many fine posts of DD posted here and on the other boards I review. Many people have been generous in sharing their DD. I spend as little time as I can looking at posts by pumpers, yet there are the occasional gems there as well. Thoughtful critical posts are also reviewed. I read many articles on the stocks in which I am potentially interested and each article on those in which I am invested, even those by AF. I have all sorts of news feeds.
I did study Graham and Dodd type investment analysis back in college, but their methods applied more to choosing which aluminum producer to invest in, rather than biotechs with their serial binary events. However, as an angel investor, I participate in and occasionally lead DD teams.
It's a good thing I'm retired and have nothing to do.
Steve
Andy,
I want to say thanks for your posting these items relating to CTSO.
Steve
Smoken,
Just try to learn from your experience and - IMHO - don't go all in on just one or two stocks. Yes, you could have a multibagger and multiply your retirement savings, but you also are puting all your capital at risk and success usually leads to the feeling that you are smart and invincible, something young people suffer from too much anyway.
The market has been acting kind of "toppy" lately, which is why I've mostly moved out of cyclicals. Yeah, small biotechs are not conservative investments, but they are more subject to binary events which can pay off REALLY well or drop to zero. I spread out my risk over a portfolio of roughly 50 stocks.
It also helps if you identify a few people on IHub who are neither pumpers nor dumpers. There are many people who have a good grasp of the science behind a biotech's drug programs and some of them have pretty good investing acumen from years of learning the hard way. Follow those people and look at the stocks they are into. Read at least the last 200 IHub messages on a board and read the last 20 articles before you decide to invest.
Just my approach.
Steve
Investor,
Yes, there is the "loss" of a potential profit, as $INO marches upward, and also the risk of not selling near a peak, as $INO has retreated from the $3 area on other occasions.
If we always look backward at what could have been, we either can: (a) learn something we can use in the next similar situation; or (b) torture ourselves over the one that got away.
I prefer not to take path (b). Please note I am not saying this is what you do, but in 48 years of investing, I've held on too long out of greed and I've sold too early. It's amazing how many mistakes I continue to make!
GLTAL.
Steve
Subs, Likewise. Steve
Bravo. Still have the bulk of my holdings (the remaining shares are up around 350% weighted average) and expect the best for INO. I could not resist getting almost my entire basis back for around 20% of my shares.
Dust,
For researching stocks I save ALL my Fierce newsletters. While I am NOT saying you are necessarily wrong, when I searched for "oncosec" and for "oncs", the most recent one which came up was 12/18/2013. A simple misspelling on Fierce would have defeated my search. Just could not confirm Fierce as the source. I'm sure you saw it somewhere.
Steve
Subs,
While I agree that both the science and the management are great here at $INO, I've been in other stocks where management ultimately was tempted to sell for a "good enough" offer far short of their potential as a stand-alone entity.
Examples of stocks sold out from under me, and which no longer exist, were Prolor and Trius. I was not unhappy with what I received, but they both had so much potential. With $INO, I just thought I'd take a bit off the table, given the volatility. I probably will regret selling, but no one ever lost money by taking a profit.
Steve
My crystal ball had me sell a few of my $1.15 shares at $3.10. Keeping most $1.15 shares and all the .51 and .42 shares. All are in a Roth, so no tax implications. Steve
Dust,
FWIW, I get various Fierce emails and the last mention of Oncosec was in December (12/18/13), mentioning interim trial results. The last mention there in connection with Merck, was when Dr. Pierce came over. That was 12/13/13.
Steve
And EDVA's response:
edvapatent commented on WDDD v. ATVI: MSJ Hearing Concluded.
in response to Practical:
Edva, You are referring to a new pacer out in the matter filed at US District Court in California? I do not see how two separate matters would affect the other. Maybe I am wrong. I only know that WDDD filed a counterclaim against ATVI in California. Great uptrend for 7 days straight and breaking [...]
The case in California was brought solely as a way to put pressure on Worlds and make it defend itself with limited resources, we said as much when it was filed. The connection could be (and I am far from saying it is) that in essentially removing a leverage point in the California action, brought entirely because of the MA case in our view, there is something being discussed relative to the MA litigation.
Is Philip Frost retiring from TEVA?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-18/billionaire-teva-chairman-may-retire-by-year-s-end.html?cmpid=yhoo
Billionaire Teva Chairman May Retire by Year’s End
By David Wainer Feb 18, 2014 11:10 AM ET
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (TEVA) Chairman Phillip Frost may retire before his board term ends next year if he can deliver on pledges to overhaul governance and find an adequate successor.
“I might not want to go that far,” Frost, 77, said of his current term by telephone from Miami yesterday. “I might want to retire sooner. Practically speaking, I’m at the age where it doesn’t really make a lot of sense to go beyond that, but that might already be longer than what I want.”
Billionaire Frost oversaw Teva’s transition from a producer of mainly copycat treatments to innovations in areas such as neurology and respiratory treatments. The Petach Tikva, Israel-based company has been under pressure to improve governance after former Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Levin’s abrupt departure last year fueled investors’ concerns that the board was rife with internal feuds and meddling in operations.
“It’s important to me that I stay as long as it feels it’s the right thing to do,” Frost said. “I’m not putting any timing on it.”
Investors led by Benny Landa want a board populated with industry veterans to support new Chief Executive Officer Erez Vigodman as Teva cuts costs amid possible generic competition this year to multiple sclerosis-treatment Copaxone, the company’s best-selling product.
Teva’s American depositary receipts jumped as much as 5.4 percent, the biggest intraday gain since Jan. 14, and traded 2.9 percent higher at 10:51 a.m. in New York. The shares closed 2.4 percent higher at 159.90 shekels in Tel Aviv.
Shrinking Board
Last year, Landa urged institutional investors to call for a special meeting to propose governance changes. He sought a reduction in the size of the 16-member board, the addition of pharmaceutical industry veterans as directors and changes to the company’s articles of association to make it easier to oust directors and to amend the articles.
Teva will shrink the size of its board and work to boost the proportion of its directors with global pharmaceutical experience, Frost said in January. The company had said that newly appointed Vigodman would remain a board member.
“Governance issues have been an interest of mine for some time,” Frost said in the interview yesterday. “The fact that recent events have highlighted governance issues is actually fine with me. The board is already far along the way to considering governance policy that will suit the company’s interests.”
Frost’s Replacement
The board is weighing the reduction of its size by three to four directors as five members’ terms end this year, according to two people familiar with the matter. The board may also appoint one director with pharma experience this year, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the information is confidential.
As Frost mulls stepping down, the question of who will replace him looms.
“There are many good people on the board,” Frost said, when asked if candidates could come from Teva. “The board will want to choose the person who they think is best suited for the job at that moment. It wouldn’t want to limit itself.”
Among Teva directors who have come forward as possible successors is Dan Propper, the two people said. Propper, 72, served as CEO of Osem Investments Ltd. for 25 years and president of the Manufacturers Association of Israel for six. Propper now heads the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee that will choose how to trim down the board and bring in new members.
Propper wasn’t available for comment, his office said. A Teva spokesman said he wasn’t immediately able to comment on planned board changes.
Fish Farm
Frost, whose first investment was an Everglades fish farm, made his fortune by selling drug ventures to pharmaceutical companies. Frost turned a 1972 $50,000 investment in Key Pharmaceuticals Inc. into a $825 million sale to Schering-Plough Corp. in 1986. He followed that with the sale of generic-drug maker Ivax Corp. to Teva for $7.4 billion in 2006 and was elected chairman of Teva in 2010.
As Teva’s shares slid in 2012, investors criticized Teva’s board for boosting director compensation and giving Frost a 74 percent raise to $900,000 while paying for his private airplane expenses.
“We will see all kinds of positive activities sooner, rather than later, and then I’ll be happy,” Frost said.
To contact the reporter on this story: David Wainer in Tel Aviv at dwainer3@bloomberg.net
A question was sent to EDVA today, asking if he knew what was happening:
edvapatent commented on WDDD v. ATVI: MSJ Hearing Concluded.
in response to Megaton:
EDVA, any thoughts on the continual rise in the PPS of WDDD. It went the .16's from last Thursday to .25 today. Haven’t seen any new news on it. Don’t know if people are anticipating a favorable decision soon thus causing it to move up.
Yes. The case that Activision filed against Worlds Online Inc. and Worlds Inc. is going to private mediation per new Pacer filed today. Not sure exactly what this means in the scope of the larger issue (MSJ) here but we’ll know something soon enough I would think.
NR, So the drinks are on you, huh? Go $CYNAF! Steve
There ae many shares being traded. The IHub charts are not all working. I show over 1.4 million shares traded. Price $2.82
Good news is long overdue.
Although if it were the near future price, I'm good with that.
FWIW, I love how the chart shows ROX at $19.05. Go $ROX.
I suspect this is an error IHub will correct soon, not a glimpse of the near future.
PRESS RELEASE
February 18, 2014, 8:06 a.m. ET
BeesFree Announces the Appointment of Steven F. Elliott as its new President and Chief Executive Officer
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., Feb. 18, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- BeesFree, Inc. (BEES) today announced the appointment of Steven F. Elliott as its next President and Chief Executive Officer effective immediately.
BeesFree is an emerging firm dedicated to improving the health and resilience of the world's honeybee population through improved nutrition. Its patent pending all-natural nutritional supplement, BeesVita Plus(TM), strengthens the honeybee enabling it to better withstand the multiple stress factors contributing to Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). In recent years, CCD has emerged as a major global threat to honeybee survival with continuing colony losses approximating 35% annually.
"Through its multi-year research and development efforts, BeesFree has spent considerable time, money and effort in pursuit of an effective, affordable feed supplement for honeybees to counteract the devastation of CCD," said Andrea Festuccia PhD, Chairman of BeesFree. "At this point in the company's development we are ready to bring on senior leadership that can drive the commercial launch of our products. Mr. Elliott was chosen due to his broad leadership abilities and demonstrated enthusiasm for our strategy. We are thrilled to have him lead our team into the future."
Mr. Elliott has the reputation as a transformational leader with a variety of experience in enterprises undergoing strategic growth and change. Most recently, he served as a partner in the establishment of the private equity fund MIRA in Mexico City where he lead the definition of its investment strategy. Prior career positions include CEO of the noted natural land developer The Lyle Anderson Companies. At The Lyle Anderson Companies he served to reposition the company through a difficult period of strategic change. Additional experience also included serving as a retained advisor to noted investment firm Farallon Capital Management and an advisory partnership role at the innovation firm Gravity Tank. Mr. Elliott has also contributed to the advancement of two significant growth platforms. He was part of the initial management team of KSL Recreation Corporation (KSL), a KKR sponsored portfolio company. KSL was a highly successful growth company in the destination resort sector. Mr. Elliott was also founder and CEO of software firm Clubessential, a startup venture funded by KSL. As an officer of Security Capital Group, he contributed to the growth of one of the most notable incubators of the modern REIT era. Mr. Elliott began his career at the investment banking firm Dillon, Read, & Co. and is a graduate of the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan.
"I am delighted to have this opportunity to contribute to the success of BeesFree with regard to such an important endeavor," said Mr. Elliott. "This is not only an attractive business venture, it is a group of people dedicated to improving critical global natural resources. It's always exciting to work in the transitional stages of a company as it unfolds its product development to a sustainable business model."
BeesFree is committed to the next stage of its mission to combat CCD. Crucial to its success will be partnering with beekeepers to jointly understand how to best ensure the continued health of these natural assets. Honeybees are pollinators of many of our most valuable fruits and vegetables and therefore their health is crucial to human health. In coordination with its science team in Rome, Italy and business headquarters in the U.S., BeesFree will continue to expand its presence in select locations over the coming year to develop local relationships in key beekeeping markets. We believe this is just the beginning of a long term strategy dedicated to impactful, nature-based innovation by BeesFree.
MEDIA CONTACTS:
BeesFree, Inc.
Steve Elliott or Joe Fasciglione
561.939.4860
j.fasciglione@beesfree.biz
SOURCE BeesFree, Inc.
/Web site: http://www.beesfree.biz
Thank you CLARENCE. Just kidding.
ok, thanks!
Wild,
I wish we all had your enthusiasm for EVERYTHING.
Steve
I'm grateful Seel led me here.
Didn't see any news - but happy I'm holding.
Not that I can interpret it but from the free legal dictionary online:
Mandamus
[Latin, We comand.] A writ or order that is issued from a court of superior jurisdiction that commands an inferior tribunal, corporation, Municipal Corporation, or individual to perform, or refrain from performing, a particular act, the performance or omission of which is required by law as an obligation.
A writ or order of mandamus is an extraordinary court order because it is made without the benefit of full judicial process, or before a case has concluded. It may be issued by a court at any time that it is appropriate, but it is usually issued in a case that has already begun.
Generally, the decisions of a lower-court made in the course of a continuing case will not be reviewed by higher courts until there is a final judgment in the case. On the federal level, for example, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291 provides that appellate review of lower-court decisions should be postponed until after a final judgment has been made in the lower court. A writ of mandamus offers one exception to this rule. If a party to a case is dissatisfied with some decision of the trial court, the party may appeal the decision to a higher court with a petition for a writ of mandamus before the trial proceeds. The order will be issued only in exceptional circumstances.
The writ of mandamus was first used by English courts in the early seventeenth century. It migrated to the courts in the American colonies, and the law on it has remained largely the same ever since. The remedy of mandamus is made available through court opinions, statutes, and court rules on both the federal and state levels. On the federal level, for example, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a) provides that courts "may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law."
The Supreme Court set forth some guidelines on writs of mandamus in Kerr v. United States District Court, 426 U.S. 394, 96 S. Ct. 2119, 48 L. Ed. 2d 725 (1976). In Kerr, the Court upheld the denial of a writ of mandamus sought by prison officials to prevent the district court from compelling them to turn over personnel and inmate files to seven prisoners who had sued the prison over alleged constitutional violations. The officials argued that turning over the records would compromise prison communications and confidentiality.
The Supreme Court observed in Kerr that the writ of mandamus was traditionally used by federal courts only to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its jurisdiction, or to compel an inferior court to exercise its authority when it had a duty to do so. The Court also noted that mandamus is available only in exceptional cases because it is so disruptive of the judicial process, creating disorder and delay in the trial. The writ would have been appropriate, opined the Court, if the trial court had wrongly decided an issue, if failure to reverse that decision would irreparably injure a party, and if there was no other method for relief. Because the prison officials could claim a privilege to withhold certain documents, and had the right to have the documents reviewed by a judge prior to release to the opposing party, other remedies existed and the writ was inappropriate.
Although traditionally writs of mandamus are rare, they have been issued in a growing number of situations. They have been issued by federal courts when a trial judge refused to dismiss a case even though it lacked jurisdiction; refused to reassign a case despite a conflict of interest; stopped a trial for Arbitration or an administrative remedy; denied a party the opportunity to intervene, to file a cross-claim, or to amend a Pleading; denied a Class Action; denied or allowed the consolidation or severance of two trials; refused to permit depositions; or entered an order limiting or denying discovery of evidence. The writ of mandamus can also be issued in a mandamus proceeding, independent of any judicial proceeding. Generally, such a petition for a mandamus order is made to compel a judicial or government officer to perform a duty owed to the petitioner. For example, in Massachusetts, each year the commonwealth's attorney general and each district attorney must make available to the public a report on wiretaps and other interceptions of oral communications conducted by law enforcement officers. If the report is not made available, any person may compel its production by filing an action for mandamus (Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 272, § 99 [West 1996]). If successful, a court would issue an order directing the attorney general and district attorneys to produce the information. The attorney general and district attorneys have a chance to defend their actions at a hearing on the action. If the parties fail to comply with a mandamus order, they may be held in Contempt of court and fined or jailed.
Not much to the interview. Lauded his educational background and threw some softball questions. He tried to downplay people's excitement and expectations.
http://www.bloomberg.com/radio/ is the link if anyone wants to listen themselves.
You CAN get the real-time quote on Fidelity, just no bid or ask.
Try the following, which at least is what I get:
https://fastquote.fidelity.com/webxpress/popup_frameset.phtml?SID_VALUE_ID=AFRMF