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.
You make an excellent point ...That being said, the interest in PUTS, particularly in the near term vastly outweighs the interest in calls. It is hard to extrapolate a meaningful inference from option positions, but it is interesting to see much interest in PUTS. I did notice that over the last few days, the prices for Sept. ITM puts/calls have come back to earth. But i can't imagine the stock being less volatile ... very odd.
Thank you for the feedback.
Interesting Chart --- Idenix & Momenta tracking each other (out of phase -- but certainly moving daily in concert)
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IDIX&t=5d&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=mnta
And to think... we could have just waited for approval, and bought MNTA in the teens ... this market is a real piece of work.
I agree that this will take time for analysts to digest, but I would not be surprised to see significant volatility (upside and downside) in the interim.
The 44 billion $ acquisition of Genentech is "aggressive" in my book. Whether the acquisition of Genentech was principally a defensive play on FoB's is debatable (perhaps even tenuous), but I think the article linked made some excellent points.
Are there any other Big Pharma's interested ("aggressively" or "tepidly") in FoB's?
There are plenty of PUTS in September that buttress your thinking on this.
Roche's takeover of Genentech was seen by some as a defensive play on FoB's. If you subscribe to this reasoning and extend further, Momenta may seem quite attractive to a company like Roche.
http://invivoblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/roche-genentech-defensive-play-on.html
MNTA: Speaking of moronic questions...
With all the recent news, and very bullish conference call ... does anyone care (or dare) to speculate on what is holding down MNTA's PPS. It was higher in 2005 on the mL patent event ...
I prefer a slow and steady rise in PPS, but being at 22$ on a day like this seems bizarre... especially when you consider companies (e.g. SQNM) have traded so much higher on pure speculation.
MNTA - Biologics Partnership....
Dew/IJ/others .. what are your thoughts on Roche partnering with Momenta on the follow-on biologics program? I recall Roche moving aggressively in that direction with the acquisition of Genentech.
What are the implications of such a partnership on Momenta's relationship with Sandoz/NVS?
i can't find explicit language in the contract that requires momenta to reimburse the development costs Sandoz picked up over the years. I did notice that the word "net sales" were used in calculating the royalty, but beyond that i found no section that covered this arrangement.
Any thoughts?
Excellent! Thanks .. this is just what i've been looking for. I've been trying to find more on the reimbursement algorithm that mandates Momenta reimburse Sandoz for development costs that Sandoz picked up over the years. I want to know what kind of effect this will have on MNTA's cashflow.
Any clues on this?
The CC is August 2nd ... they moved it up.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Momenta-Pharmaceuticals-pz-370702969.html?x=0&.v=1
http://ir.momentapharma.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=493523
Raising money may be a good way for the company to hedge against improbable, though possible, negative unknowns (e.g. TEVA approval, court approving preliminary injunction in favor of SNY, etc...).
The more i think about the weakness in stock price, the more likely i think it is that MNTA is looking to raise more cash. I think after the secondary is digested, the stock price should move up steadily.
Prognostication: If they do raise, I think it will be in the ~22.50-25.00 range and will be announced w/in the next 10 business days. They may drop some hints tomorrow morning at the CC.
Dew or others, I am trying to dig up a copy of the Sandoz-Momenta Collaboration agreement. I cannot find 10k's/10q's going far back enough. Can you help me find a copy (if it exists)?
I noticed that as well Dew. I think "authorized generic by the branded manufacturer" comes to mind ... analysts mistakingly shorten it.
MNTA: Deutsche Bank Coverage (from 2009)
Deutsche Bank Initiates Coverage on Momenta Pharmaceuticals (MNTA) with a Buy; Believe M-Enoxaparin & M118 Will Be FDA Approved
September 18, 2009 8:33 AM EDT
Deutsche Bank initiates coverage on Momenta Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: MNTA) with a Buy. Price target $15.
Deutsche analyst says, "We rate Momenta a buy based on our belief M-Enoxaparin & M118 will be approved by the FDA...We believe multiple Lovenox generics are likely to be approved in 2010+...We believe comments from the FDA suggest that if a generic uses the same starting product as the brand, complete characterization may not be required. In addition, we believe Xa:IIa activity assays will be sufficient to prove therapeutic equivalence. We see the fair-valuation of MNTA under this scenario at $18/share...We believe M118 is an undervalued asset and provides downside protection."
"Our $15 price target is based on a probability-adjusted sum of the parts analysis. We place a 50% probability that M-Enoxaparin is approved along side other generic Lovenox applicants (we estimate the fair valuation under this scenario is $18), a 40% probability that M-enoxaparin is rejected (we estimate the fair valuation under this scenario is $5), a 9% probability M-Enoxaparin approved along side a branded generic (we estimate fair valuation under this scenario is $34) and a 1% probability M-Enoxaparin is the only generic on the market (we estimate fair-valuation under this scenario is $66)."
To see more analyst ratings on MNTA Click Here.
Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a biotechnology company, specializes in the structural analysis of complex mixture drugs.
21.5$ per share ... obviously the market is pricing them just right (efficient markets) ;P
Once you stopped buying, there simply wasn't enough to keep the momentum going :) ... This is settling into a new range. Let's hope it finds a bottom soon so we can retest the upper limit of the range. I do think that the Sanofi lawsuit, whatever you may think of it, is having an adverse affect on the short-term. Once some do their own "DewDiligence", we should move higher, irrespective of the silly lawsuit and Sanofi securing "long-term" GPO contracts. (hah!)
0% .. wow, I appreciate you putting yourself out there on this.
I would urge you to read the Readmefirst ... there are some analyst notes about the claims construction arguments and court opinion implications.
I do believe MNTA will get more expensive.
Do you believe that a lack of willingness by MNTA management to sell the company is truly in the way of a buyout? I am looking at this from NVS vantage point -- wouldn't it be better for them to offer a sizeable premium NOW (to overcome management resistance), than twiddle the thumbs and wait for MNTA to become more expensive? If NVS is truly interested in the technology, then I suspect it is in their best interest to pay now and not pay more later... in other words, why should NVS wait?
I agree on most of your points.
But I would be surprised if big holders would want to sell MNTA (post m-enox approval) at these levels because of capital gains changes starting 1/1/2011.
NVS buyout of MNTA:
Now that the Alcon deal is almost consumated and that the FDA has validated MNTA's platform, what is the likelihood that NVS makes a tender offer for MNTA. If they wait, it will only get more expensive and their leverage over MNTA will diminish. What is in their way of making an offer tomorrow....
Indeed. There is always a buyer and a seller, but its clear that this was a purchase at the ASK and not a dump against the bid.
It is hard to read into AH trading.
It could be unsettled trades, but I don't think so.
The person(s) may not have wanted to purchase 400k on the open market, todays volume was relatively low and that may have triggered a spike in prices or led to the stock moving higher. The person(s) may want to purchase under the radar and keep the price low for additional accumulation.
Two big blocks (400k total) just hit MNTA AH @ 21.78
One more (62.5k) just went through @ 21.5
Someone taking advantage of weakness to load up.
polly... i think the volatility in MNTA, will lead it to bounce back and break through the recent highs well before 8/17.
MNTA: if you liked it at 22.69, you'll love it at 21.69. :)
Sanofi Guidance Post Lovenox Approval: Guidance Lowered for the rest of the year by 4.5% - 600million $ in Profit. (1.2 billion annualized).
Some of that money should float to MNTA this year. 200-250 million extra in a MNTA cash checking account by end of the year would be great!
Was there a discussion at todays SNY conference call around GPO contracts for m-enox on the hospital side?
MNTA: Volume has dried.
This has been over-analyzed to death. This lawsuit is nothing more than noise. It will go nowhere.
SNY's interpretation of the statute is joke, the moment the judge reads the statute he will laugh at SNY's argument. Sanofi's lawyers better watch out that they don't get hit with sanctions under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 11(b) ...
The Sanofi suit alleges that FDC Act § 505(j)(2)(A)“specifically precludes FDA from requiring the submission of such [safety and effectiveness] information." This is NOT true.
The language of 505(j)(2)(A) stipulates...
"The Secretary may not require that an abbreviated application contain information in addition to that required by clauses 505(j)(2)(A)(i) through 505(j)(2)(A)(viii)."
But section (505(j)(2)(A)(iv) of the statute provides plenty of room for the FDA to request "information" it needs to help it assure bioequivalency.
(2)(A) An abbreviated application for a new drug shall contain—
...
"(iv) information to show that the new drug is bioequivalent to the listed drug referred to in clause (i), except that if the application is filed pursuant to the approval of a petition filed under subparagraph (C), information to show that the active ingredients of the new drug are of the same pharmacological or therapeutic class as those of the listed drug referred to in clause (i) and the new drug can be expected to have the same therapeutic effect as the listed drug when administered to patients for a condition of use referred to in clause (i)"
Read the statute for yourself....
http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/FederalFoodDrugandCosmeticActFDCAct/FDCActChapterVDrugsandDevices/ucm108125.htm
Interesting that both MNTA & IDIX are under assault today ... both down nearly the same amount... makes you wonder.
DFRAI,
Good looking out ... shorts are indeed out in full force on Yahoo!, slamming MNTA and looking for the stock to get back to $10 very soon.
Interesting that they have swarmed so aggressively. I'm hearing that there are no shares left to borrow for shorting on E-trade? Can anyone confirm?
Irreparable harm is a non-starter under case law... It is highly unlikely that Sanofi will be able to meet the threshold needed to prove irreparable harm.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Shalala, 923 F. Supp. 212, 220-21 (D.D.C.
1996) (finding no irreparable harm where the movant would lose eighty million dollars–less than
one percent of its total sales)
Lightfoot v. District of Columbia, No. 01-1484, 2006
WL 175222, *8 (D.D.C. Jan. 24, 2006) (holding that losses must threaten the survival of a
business)
TGS Tech., Inc. v. United States, No. 92-0062, 1992 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 195, at *10 (D.D.C. Jan. 14, 1992) (finding no irreparable harm where a lost contract
constituted twenty percent of the movant’s business).
I've never seen such wide, Bid/Ask spreads (up to 10 cent spreads) on millions of shares traded. This stock has strange volatility, it will do crazy things every so often.
Interesting action on the ticker ...
i think that is a play on "insofar"
This stock has some strange liquidity. i think we will see a monster pop at some point this week....