I've seen the report. And yes it is crazy (at a virtually unhinged level).

Do you know how much resources it would take to do 20m tests a day as mentioned in the report? And yes, that is after shutting down the economy, 83k dead, 35m out of work. And no, that report doesn't have have a solution to actually doing 20m tests a day, and 600m tests a month - it just says "our computer model says this is the optimum way, government, you figure the details and shit out". And even then, we can't guarantee anything!

The reality maybe is we shouldn't shut down at all, and just continue life as usual while only treating those with major symptoms of the disease. Then the economy wouldn't be destroyed, no?

So there again is the "we are amazing! we are rich! the US can do anything!" magic beans answer.

I haven't yet seen one single realistic proposal (including how much it would cost and how badly the economy would react to a full scale monster mobilization and government command economy like that) and a cost-benefit proposal vs running for 6 months on a Swedish model.

The reality is, even with your magic beanz proposal, assuming we did it, many folks would still die. Most likely less than if we kept going Swedish style - but how many less? Nobody seems to know.

Yes but how would that help if 50% of the carriers are asymptomatic?

The more I've read about this, the more I think this is unfeasible and probably wrongly used as a stick to beat the administration with.

1. How would we even do this in the US, with 300m population. This isn't a tiny island nation like Taiwan or Singapore (often you hear it compared with the US which is totally unrealistic). Take Florida alone which is huge and full of vulnerable (elderly) population. To do massive statewide testing how much resources would you need? To get results and process them at a lab how many labs would we need to build magically in days?

Whenever I hear these arguments brought up the answers to how we could realistically get it done is "we are the richest and most advanced nation in the world - we should be able to figure it out!" which is kind of like the CNN way of saying "lets magic up a solution".

2. Lets say we magically do it once. The experts are saying we need to do it at least 2X a month for years on end. This kind of effort is crazy and even in WW2 was unheard of.

3. Even if we magically (1) managed to do massive nationwide testing and (2) managed to repeat it for 6 months until the US was free of the Wuhan flu, what about other nations? What're the odds that we need to shut our borders for months / years on the off chance that some random Chinese tourist or African traveller brings it in from their less-developed, less-tested nation? And then what? Start from scratch all over again?

The more I hear, the more I'm convinced that Sweden and Trump are right. We kind of need to bite the bullet and get it over with, because there is no cure to the disease.

They filed the case in Nevada, in the 9th District.

Thats about the dumbest thing they did wrong (which is a massive, glaring, cherry-red error).

Still grinds my gears that they didn't file in the 7th or the 8th circuit which are reliably the most conservative.

This doesnt make sense at all.

Spend millions in attorney fees just to lose a case and then enter 6 months after TEVA?

They could have done that without bringing the case.

If they wanted to lose they would have offered a cheap and easy settlement. My guess is they didn't expect to win but they definitely WANTED to win.

A partnership could be a first step to the partner buying out AMRN (depending on the deal).

A partnership has more potential of a future BO vs a straight EU rights sale to a BP (to me that would be the clearest sign yet that JT wants GIA).

If BP already bought the rights to EU (the only big market left) then its 100% betting the house on the appeal win.

Vol only 6.2k. Doubt it.

If somebody knew something volumes would be 100k++ at a minimum.

Wow that means zero growth, or maybe even declining / sharply declining revenues until 2021.

Why would that be a good thing?

And furloughing folks for an entire year or more.... what makes you think the good ones will stick around?

The company should consider moving out non- or low-performing reps, but then they should be doing that even if they WON the case. I think it should be BAU until we lose the appeal honestly.

Absolutely none that you would be happy with.

The biggest one I can think of would be PTLA that rafunfun posted about but check out the price destruction on that one.

Yall would give JT hell if he agreed to that kind of deal. It'd be like selling at $11.

Do you really think its easy to sell a company during a stock market crash + a pandemic.

Life isn't like a movie. It sounds like people think a BO is just BP execs walking into AMRN boardroom with briefcases of cash and then cue suspenseful music, a staredown, some wisecracks, and then a handshake thats it deal done.

The reality is, 40 days is a short time. It can take a year, or more.

I agree with you on BO, but I think channel stuffing is almost certainly incorrect.

If management really think a BP buyer would be impressed by such juvenile tricks as channel stuffing then management really is a bunch of idiots. These guys have a direct line to any pharmacy in the first world. Do you think they wouldn't discover during due d that AMRN was channel stuffing.

Yes but do you think its fair to compare CELG a mid-sized pharma with an established pipeline of drugs vs AMRN a small(ish) cap pharma with 1 drug?

I am not a lawyer, but I think your 2nd theory is a very tough sell.

1) If they knew there were potential problems with the patents, why would they not settle at all costs instead of litigate (assuming they were not overconfident or gamblers as in theory 1)?

2) If they didn't know but should have known there were potential problems, well as rafun says, they hired 3rd party reputable law firms to consult them on the case, so in any case, even if this is true, their asses are covered..

Come on, if you have a science background, you would know nothing is ever "new" or "novel" but validation via exhaustive experimentation is grounds for "discovery".

That's like saying Einstein didn't "invent" or shouldn't have credit for the "obvious" theorem of E = mc2 because there were some random lesser-known physicists, who had a vague general idea of the relationship between energy and mass centuries earlier:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/was-einstein-the-first-to-invent-e-mc2/

There's also the possibility that JT WAS approached by a BP suitor, but they made winning the patent trial dependent on any confirmed offer.

It makes complete sense that a BP would want the patent threat resolved before shelling out big $$$. They may not have wanted to see a settlement as another generic could just challenge later, and possibly succeed.

If i'm paying up to $10B for a business, I want that thing to be rock-solid. No rug pulled out from under me halfway

marjac, you are a smart guy and I respect your opinion.

However, I can virtually say that your supposition of management being overconfident or negligent by refusing to settle and letting this proceed to trial instead of pursuing a reasonable settlement - is wrong.

Look, JT has many flaws, but overconfident, headstrong and arrogant, he is definitely not. Just listen to one of our conference calls. Our fearless leader definitely isn't the Elon Musk type.

100% agree.

Also, AMRN settled with TEVA, showing that the company is not so obtuse to a reasonable settlement instead of expensive, uncertain litigation.

This rant about JT being ignorant / overconfident and foolishly rejecting all settlements is well misguided.

You can hear the way JT talks in his conference calls and his lowball estimates - I can virtually guarantee the man is not naturally disposed to being overconfident....

I think you are unfortunately, 100% correct.

https://bergermontague.com/can-promulgated-court-opinion-be-vacated-part-2/

Given that Du was already prejudiced against AMRN or branded drug manufacturers, there's no way she would consent to vacate her judgement

No I seriously doubt it.

Face masks work to reduce spreading the disease if the person infected is wearing it, and is only minimal effective if an uninfected person wears it and comes into contact with an infected person not wearing a mask.

This is why healthcare workers face significantly higher infection rates despite having significantly more PPE (despite all the reported shortages) than your man on the street.

Being Asian myself, my guess is it is more likely to do with:

1) Asian Americans being generally of higher socio-economic status and as such either more likely to have jobs that let them work at home, or more likely to afford to stay at home more and ride out the outbreak rather than African Americans who may desperately need to take riskier jobs that expose themselves more to earn $ (ie working at grocers, or essential services that come into contact with more people).

2) African americans being more at risk for certain co-morbidities due to diet / lifestyle (maybe diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, etc)

But doubtless, someone will find a way to blame Trump.

My 2c is our timing really sucked.

I don't believe any BO was serious (or in the best interests of shareholders, unlike Omthera) until after ADCOM in Nov.

We did really well there, but then the period between then and DU was time where it was really difficult to conduct buyout discussions.

First, we had xmas and the holidays. Everything really shuts down for a couple weeks.
Then we had the trial, which presumably took up some of the management's time and effort.
Then we had the shutdown and the pandemic. The SP took a massive hit (down from $20s to low teens, which really must have messed up any valuations).
Then DU.

There wasn't really that much time that was wasted fiddling while Rome burns. IMHO of course.

Ah, so your username really means:

ilovebiotech

Good luck with NWBO. I effin hate and love biotech at the same time. its like a poker game where every hand is an all-in binary play.

I dabble in bio more for the fun of it than the profit potential. In this sector long enough to know there are far more losers than winners (although the right winner can make you wildly rich).

AMRN Du decision was one of the few binaries that I didn't hedge, I normally hedge with the science because studies are fickle but I had a bit more faith in our legal system and our judges to put aside personal politics and bias. Sadly, I was wrong.

Man, how much do I wish I was 100% invested in tech right now instead of significant % of my portfolio in bio and CG.

With your username, you kinda got the right idea lol. Any tips? Already own SQ, V and PLAN.

Yeah OK. But sadly, unless you somehow own a secret controlling stake in the company, things don't always happen on your timelines (or really, on any of our timelines).

Or, they may actually be happening, you just aren't privy to that info.

So cheer up. You're along for the ride whether you like it or not. No point being miserable - in that case you're better off selling and feeling better.

Legally? Probably they could get an FDA label for it.

But then the generics could still sell Vascepa "off-label" anyway based on the DUfus ruling. So I think financially justifying any company investment into running a trial using Vascepa on COVID-19 would be difficult, even if you can get a patent.

Hardly the same

In this case its the direct opposite. AMRN having a very narrow patent (NOT EXPIRED) and having another patent done on account of conducting a very expensive and game-changing study that took years.

If this Doofus of a decision is upheld, this could have a chilling effect on any forms of research done on existing drugs - for example, take Hydroxychloroquinine (which has gone generic).

Assume it has potential to treat covid-19. Aside from altruism, why would any pharma ever fund a study to test this?

On the last question (cash buyout no CVR) - is there no option lower than $10?

I think that's what we'll get (probably $9-$10) if we push for buyout in this economically depressed and uncertain period.

Personally, to maximize shareholder value, my preference would be to get very well connected activist investors in (same impact as BP for appeal, but with much better value outcome for shareholders albeit at higher risk) or to drag out appeal process until next year and then sell at the end of the year or Q1 2021 when times are better.

Both options have a higher risk profile and require far more patience though.

You need to learn some patience. Selling a company in this situation is tough.

Yes we are all in a bad spot right now. Sometimes life sucks.

If you can't take the waiting, you can always sell your stock.

Yes there are 100s of posts about buyout every single day on this board. Do you think the company hasn't thought about this?

Jeez at this point its approaching a tragicomedy.

I agree they should sell the company, but have you ever considered that shopping a co in the midst of a pandemic and nationwide shutdown is hard? Let alone a co headquartered in Ireland (which requires significantly more due diligence and the possibility of international travel which is a no-go right now).

It takes time and that's assuming that there are buyers - buyers could be lowballing hard or even not interested (at the moment) to conserve cash. BPs are also facing hard times, with Merck reporting significantly lower guidance - someone in their position is gonna be throwing fistfuls of cash around now, are they?

I dont get what would satisfy you. JT to outright come out and say "Yes we are in talks to sell the company"? Well if the deal collapses, management will lose all credibility, and guess what, SP will be back down to $4. Do you really want that risk?

Activist investors usually go public, but they don't need to go public right away.

Take Carl Icahn as an example:
https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/news/2019/11/18/hp-xerox-merger-icahn.html



The news report came out in November. But this guy was already buying shares in April!

Our investor(s) could be buying now, and only going public after the pandemic news cycle (to maximize publicity). But who knows really.

Yeah something is up. But given the C-19 situation. I don't think its a buyout tbh.

If the company is sold for $11 now as opposed to (potentially) $25 in a year, would that make you happy?

It would be a kick in the teeth to sell for pennies now and then later win the appeal.

As much as I am a proponent of a BO (and have been for a long time), the market is not in a good place right now. I dont think buyers will be generous.

CBB:

You have hundreds if not thousands of posts advocating for a buyout.

But your targets are extremely unrealistic.

EU alone $20 + a CVR to take us to potentially $30 with the stock languishing below $10?

I think even if you get your desired buyout - the price almost certainly will be disappointing for you.

My conspiracy theory on the rise in share price and the large trades AH / Dark pool

1) No buyout
2) No appeal surprise
3) No settlement (none yet so far anyways)

I believe we have new stakeholders. Some funds willing to take a punt and are buying (and possibly hold some of their position via calls bought at $7 or $8 back when SP was $4).

My guess is these new investors aren't passive as well, but will take an activist involvement.

We'll soon see if I was right or this is wild, incorrect, idle speculation.

It's a buy and a sale at the same time. That's kinda how these things work..... lol

dmiller is absolutely right on this one.

There was no leak, just someone buying 2m through the day.

HOWEVER. Someone purchasing 2m is very interesting. Was it a big fund? Someone has been purchasing large large chunks of AMRN for sure. That's a cool $16m high-conviction drop in a single day, certainly no day trade.

Well, TEVA filed in Delaware.

And our geniuses filed in Nevada.

I think there is our difference. WTF made our idiots file in the 9th circuit.

https://www.drugs.com/farxiga.html



Taking Farxiga can rot your junk off.

If that isn't a drug-killing side effect, well, competitors aren't marketing hard enough.

Between a safe, proven, minimal side effect drug like Vascepa and my junk falling off, I know which drug I'm taking..