I'll make a few observations-
i) I still think a financing is not guaranteed
ii) I will threaten Joe to sell hundreds of thousands of shares if Joe does not make a better effort to find a better banker than Oppenheimer if for some reason we have to do a financing. Last go round Opco did a decent job of generating "buzz" around the time of the offering and hence the stock price moved but afterward they disappeared- they put the stock in relatively weak hands and there was little to no aftermarket support and Mr Abrahams has been an out of touch lousy analyst to date who has generated little buzz himself. And yes, thats what I really think.

Oppenheimer conference call on Proellex on Friday with industry experts 11am est. If you have an acct with Opco, you should get the dial-in and listen. I will try to post any new info- pls dont ask for the dial-in, as i dont want to be responsible for ferreting out who has an acct with them.

This is a nice change as far as a step up of increasing awareness after months of silence.

Franklin just went over 5%- added 240k or so from prior position.

I bet the short interest now is 1.6 MM over 1.389 MM when reported from 1/15 trade date.

Two comments:
i) I bet the short interest is higher as of today or as of 1/28 or end of month which will be reported 2/11.
ii) if filing for IND is not announced as accepted by 2/15, I would suggest someone should call Joe to ask about it given guidance was that it was filed beginning or so of January.

Crou,
FOr you to insinuate Efficacy is doing anything but buying when they feel the price is low or a good bargain and buying based on (i) stock price (ii) liquidity (iii) the needs of their fund at the time including cash position, etc. is ridiculous.

I would imagine the acceptance would be PRed

Day 13 on Threshold

My understanding is that the anemia IND has been filed and is awaiting acceptance.

I'd love to see a 5 million share short position on this stock, because I'm almost sure that a large portion of the people now holding aren't looking to cash out when the stock goes to $15 next time. We've surely only held onto the most stalwart of owners at this point. Unless Docbanker's fund is fast money... LOL
----Let's just say there are a lot of shares fund-wise and PERSONAL-wise, that are not selling anytime soon.

It seems Quantumdot has reappeared to bash the company and longs again. Frankly, I have no idea who has,if anyone, stopped their shares from being lent out, whether you are speaking of Efficacy or whomever. I just called our prime broker Goldman and he could lend me 5k or 10k MAXIMUM if i wanted to take that side of the trade. He noted that he couldnt get much at all and whoever is big is big somewhere else (as evidenced by the fact that Goldman could still get small).

As of yesterday's update it had been on the list for 12 days. That means that there has been a failure for 12+7= 19 days as it takes 7 days of failures to get onto the list.
There has not been an update today but I presume today will be day 20.

i can remember when ACOR was $2 and no one wanted to buy it. I think Visium was the only fund to step up big. They're smart and have a decent sized holding in RPRX.

Heck, I bet in the 8 days since the 1/10 trades were posted I bet the short interest increased beyond 1.389 MM. I bet it is 1.45-1.5 MM now.

if i were them i'd be selling puts.

Part of the reason we dont see them buying right now IMO is that the volume is too low and if they buy, say, 5k per day, it is quite expensive to file an amended 13G every 2 days. so you bought 10k shares but you have to pay a grand or so to file an amendment. I would assume if volume picked up they might buy.

"I was more focused on a wolf appearing in sheeps clothing in terms of a long pretending to like the company and cozying up to JP and saying they want to buy some of a potential future offering while at the same time owning no shares and actually shorting a lot of stock"

Doc, I don't understand how a possible short could appear to Joe as if they are a long and fool him. Joe should have a current SEC list of institutional long holders to ensure he knows who is who right?

---- I was more referring to callers on the conf call who were asking some questions who feigned a lot of interest but may have been trying to add some FUD along the way. Its done all the time. I do it on my shorts' conference calls. This same person while doing this may be short and may be asking JP to "participate" or lead a future offering. Thus appearing like they want to buy but using the stock to cover. Yes, Joe has access to holders but not short positions.

Yo, Doc.

"was more focused on a wolf appearing in sheeps clothing in terms of a long pretending to like the company and cozying up to JP and saying they want to buy some of a potential future offering while at the same time owning no shares and actually shorting a lot of stock"


So, if this is the case, you think that someone sidling up to Joe and sniffing around might have heard something that would encourage that kind of behavior, when speaking with Joe? I mean if Joe was getting point blank questions by a "potential long" investor with the hopes of finding some shares in a capital event would they have not gotten the "no go" signal from him?

---- What i think and hope Joe is telling people is the same as what many people are saying: the company has financial flexibility and may not do a raise- I wouldnt count on getting shares from a raise.

""i wouldnt put it past some institutions to have shorted the stock en masse and at the same time approach JP asking him to be involved in an offering down the road""

doc banker,,,,that is such an excellent likelyhood.

It would make most sense for Efacicy to be the accumulating shorter,,,,it being like a hedge for them.

Is it legal for Efacicy?,,,that is the question.

------I highly doubt EFficacy is doing this as someone pointed out correctly that they would have to post a net ownership position. I was more focused on a wolf appearing in sheeps clothing in terms of a long pretending to like the company and cozying up to JP and saying they want to buy some of a potential future offering while at the same time owning no shares and actually shorting a lot of stock. If you listen to RPRX's last conference call, there was one such institution that has held in the past and was drilling JP on questions but does not show up on the holders list- I am suspicious of them and would put my money if i were a betting man on them being a portion of the short interest.

Perhaps they are waiting for the stock to go lower. They probably want gun powder in case the short goes from 1.4 MM shares to 2.0 MM and the share price starts to break.

If you notice, the main Efficacy person has not yet accepted the BOD invitation which tells me they are not necessarily done buying in the near-term. If he were to go on the BOD, the timing of his purchases would be severely restricted.

Agree.
Joe's got Efficacy, other longs, partnership potential and possibly some short term debt potential.

ymaxx i thought you had a negative slant on RPRX fromm your prior comments though those might have just been short-term trading based. Are you more positive now? Are you encoraged by the building short position? Are you still negative?
More of your thoughts are welcome.

I continue to agree with the previous poster who mentions the sheer number of options to the company (was it biopete?) i wouldnt put it past some institutions to have shorted the stock en masse and at the same time approach JP asking him to be involved in an offering down the road,

Who knows if it was a short covering or a short shorting more.
or even if the short was involved.

I would guess most retail persons are out so to direct blame on an institution for selling, if it was the case, seems a bit misdirected.

NITE crossed the trade.

Like I said, i know some institutions who are buying.
we'll know more when short interest comes out tonight and when the form 13s are updated for 12/31.

Catalysts as I see them:
i) IND for anemia accepted within 2-4 wks
ii) Start Fibroids trials and anemia trials next 2 months
iii) prelim endo data late Q2
iv) data from 2nd round of dosing for fibroids from PIIb 1-3 months
v) the meetings someone mentioned
vi) starting of 2 PIIb androxal studies, Q1

Looks like not much stock is trading. I personally know of 3 institutional buyers over last month. I believe I know who 2 of the shorters are- they are hoping to get shares in some hypothetical offering if and when that supposedly happens.
I will be interested to see the SI data after the close today. I would be shocked if we werent at least 50k-100k higher than the report from 2 wks prior to that.

Yup. I would bet the short interest that comes out tomorrow for 1/15 is higher than the number from 2 weeks prior to that.

Looked like someone tried to dump today and it was absorbed well. It truly amazes me that people do this, if you have a block to sell, you know which brokers market make and have contacts with large holders, yet some people insist on dumping 10k at a time on the bid. Not sure if it is a dumb seller or a short trying to crack it. Nonetheless we looked good after the dump today.

Dew You're retarded. Purchases directly from the company are not always at a discount. I suggest you take a look at the Lexicon deal last year and the recent ISIS deal (one was a financial investor and one a strategic one)- both were at PREMIUMs to market.

WHy do you spout your mouth off without knowing anything?

Nerf is correct- i did say buyin. Actually it looked today as some sort of seller was cleaned up with a 50k share block. Then buying came in and we closed higher. Not sure if the buying was a long topping off his position or a short covering but it was not a "buy-in". My experience with buy-ins is that they last the full day (spread out throughout day) so I presume this wasnt one.

When is the buyin coming again? I want to see another dollar plus move like last time. Anyone know if my prime broker can let me know which broker is failing to deliver? Guess I have some calls to make.

It was widely talked about at JPM conference that the trials might not cost as much as previously thought. That buys time in terms of cash. Perhaps finding a partner timeline was increased. Remember, lots of options here aside from a public financing.

My points, no matter how hard you try to blur them, were... that at this time I do not see a very small micro-fund owning 33% as a nett positive for retail longs and further I do not believe those taking up significant short positions are "weak hands" as you earlier described them.
---I view Efficacy as a fund that has a strong track record of returns and and a track record of helping strategic alternatives for companies come to fruition. That's indisputable. The shorts here are betting on a large public financing. That's an interesting bet given the number of other options available to the company including going right to existings if they ever have to raise money.

You seem very defensive? Are you on the wrong side of this trade or just over extended?
---Wrong side, no; I am long since the follow-on at $4. Overextended, no; with investments coming in each month, in fact we're underinvested.

Not many people call me dude and get away with it; but I like you.
---You sound like Lt. Col. Frank Slade from Scent of a Woman; he was pretty tough and I like him so by the transitive property I must like you too. I love when he says "If I were the man I was five years ago, I'd take a flamethrower to this place!" That was great.

I strongly believe that if there is an option of (i) the stock price staying artificially low (here or lower) due to people spreading misnomers like DewDiligence (some sort of warning label B.S.), some sell-side analysts who do not cover the stock (they think there is still a cancer risk) and/or people convinced there is going to be some sort of near-term large financing well below market prices and/or people spreading rumors that Efficacy is a one-man shop without a track record OR (ii) one holder absorbing shares for sale at this low price and maintaining stability in the stock even if his holdings eventually exceed 20%, I will gladly choose option #2.

Seriously, I know a lot of the top holders and they arent selling- if there is no bad news going forward, covering is going to be a bitch.

Small one man shop with a limited track record?
---You clearly don't hang in Wall Street circles. They are a 3-4 man shop with everyone full-time dedicated to scrubbing the whole small-cap btk sector and have returned 50% in multiple years whereas the Nasdaq small-cap btk index has been flat to down. Ask Caxton, XMark and others who shut down their biotech and healthcare funds how hard it was to have good returns in the last few years.
Knowledge is power, dude.

Small one man shop with a limited track record?
---You clearly don't hang in Wall Street circles. They are a 3-4 man shop with everyone full-time dedicated to scrubbing the whole small-cap btk sector and have returned 50% in multiple years whereas the Nasdaq small-cap btk index has been flat to down. Ask Caxton, XMark and others who shut down their biotech and healthcare funds how hard it was to have good returns in the last few years.
Knowledge is power, dude.

regarding if anyone has the question if efficacy buying a large position is good or not- the alternative is them not buying, the shorts having shorted 1MM shares with few buyers and a stock price at 6-7. Anyone want the stock at 6-7 vs 9-10?

ethan,
I received your msg- i do not have private msg capabilities- i was too cheap to spend the $. LOL. I honestly think Efficacy increasing position is a great thing. Many people I know know them including me and I honestly believe they have the best intentions, they see a massively undervalued and underrecognized story and want to own as much as they can. Frankly, with them buying stock, if the short position hadnt have increased by a million shares, i think we'd be into the teens by now. in the short term investors especially in this space are stupid. Look at NBIX- they have NOTHING. GnRH doesnt work well and their market cap is well above that of RPRX. doesnt make any sense.
I think we will all be well rewarded when data starts coming out, it is published and we attract more attention. Look how desperate big pharma is for drugs- look at the ISIS deal, look at the ADLR deal. Good luck.

I do not understand why Efficacy's additional equity stake is good for Repros. What is the advantage of having one shareholder own 33% as opposed to 20%?
---You're the first person I've ever met who doesn't want as many people as possible to own as much stock as possible in a name they own. Why isn't it good for them to soak up shares from weak hands. Frankly, if they weren't buying this recent short "attack" (I say attack b/c the short interest hasnt been this high in many years) would have moved the stock lower. Would you prefer to see the stock lower?


Also, if Repros needs to raise cash in qtr. 2 or 3 how is that good news for Efficacy owning an additional 13% prior to a float?
---If Efficacy keeps buying, it is supporting the price to some degree so if the company ever did have to raise money they could do it at a higher price so it is less dilutive. How is that not good?

Somethings up- not sure if its good for longs.
---Yes, something's up. If you do your diligence on Efficacy you'd see that they've accomplished quite a bit in terms of working with management teams to better operations, strategic decision making and ultimately in extracting maximum value for investors. You should ask the shareholders who owned Praecis at $2 if they were happy that Efficacy helped negotiate a sale of the company for $5 after acquiring a large stake.

Do some work instead of just posting hypothecations!

YMaxx,
I think the this is one of the 5-10% instances where piling onto a short actually burns them vs allowing them to make money. I think as they were piling on starting with the decline on that day in early december, Efficacy amongst others were buying long. Now the price is $1-2 higher and a million more shares are short. For them to short 50k more a week and potentially drive the price down 10 cents is like focusing on winning the battle (a week) but knowing you are going to lose the war (few months).
I think their strategy usually works as there is capitulation but they underestimated the resources and resolve of some larger holder longs. Personally I think we see more longs adding here soon. I short a lot of stocks and run a market neutral book and i would be covering asap when i saw the poison pill get moved from 20 to 33%.

The move from lows 9s to low 10s a few wks ago was a buy-in in my opinion. The broker had to have shares and given the volume was 120k or so that day, i presume about 50k were bought in. now we are on threshold list again- if i were trading shares, i'd probably own some just for the high probability that we get another buy-in. if 50k moves it a buck and we now have 1.2 mm short, wow!

Jeffrey Jay is a partner at Great Point so those filings are duplicative.

The way I see it is this: You have one or more fundamental buyers including Efficacy accumulating. You have a number of shorts shorting. It seems this is in equilibrium right now as the price is somewhat stagnant. As a fellow portfolio manager, I know the type of work someone like Efficacy does and they are making a big bet. On the other hand, the shorts are hoping for either bad trial news or a large public financing. I dont see either of those happening. With the increase of the threshold for the poison pill to 33% for Efficacy and the provision that allows them to buy shares either in the public market or from the company directly, why would anyone bet that there would be a large public offering- if the company ever had to raise capital, why not go to existings and sell shares to them? Rights offering, etc.

Either way, its going to be interesting. Personally, I think long is the side that will win and win immensely.

My guess is that they are either (i) non-fundamental investors who saw the price decline in early Dec and piled on trying to push it down. One person who was buying that day noted that they were suprised about the number of shares for sale that day in the 7s OR (ii) they are people who believe the company is going to raise money soon- I think these people are wrong. The company has a good amount of flexibility right now strategically and they wont need money in 1H, so to assume there is a raise coming in the next month or two is incorrect thinking in my opinion.

Now we know who has been selling to Efficacy- short interest up 300k during first 2 wks of Dec.

You're concerned?

Would you rather an investor with a great track record and a history of facilitating the sale of companies (look at Praecis amongst others) be buying or have henny penny holders who were claiming the sky was falling at $7, we would get black box warnings, and other made up things of the sort.

Personally I'd rather have the former sucking up the shares of the latter.

Yes, we are acqaintances. I think he's about as smart of a healthcare investor and does as intensive of due diligence as there is- that's all I am going to say.