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.
Which is a reasonable view.
It is not clear how much of your position sizing adjustments (aka trading profits) have come from mechanical portfolio adjustments and how much from valuation - nor does it matter. Saying a stock worth holding (or buying) is a stock worth buying (or holding) is an overly simplistic tautology when building, exiting, or trading around a position based on valuation.
Congrats on the trading profits.
The only point (if there is one) is that "your money" being on a particular drug in development is more a matter of you having already been invested rather than an impetus for buying or an actual preference. It matters more to some than to others.
Yes - although I did make an error on the price comp for XBI - right day wrong year. Over the same period XBI had a much smaller loss (crudely 25% to 50%).
The points all remain the same even if the specific example is less compelling. SPY is up (crudely) 65% over the same period with low fees, a beta of 1, and regular distributions.
Which brings up the point of active management versus an index. By relying on the fund to do your research for you you also have to live with their decisions. Fair or not, HQL peaked in 2015 (!!!) having gone from about 31 to about 13.5 over that period. Over the same time frame XBI is up from about 60 to about 67.5, as a comparison.
Obviously one can pick different time periods, etceteras. I'm not arguing that one or the other is right for anyone or that there are no other options. There are many arguments that can be made on all sides - I just thought to point out a few of them. EOS.
NNVC
Worse. The odds they get it as far as Phase 1 are essentially zero based on past performance.
Yet they are still in contract. From the FGEN side there was some language on their call that indicated discussions were still ongoing and that AZN had certain contractual obligations.
So it remains to be seen. It would not be surprising for them to exit the US market, however there is still application in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and other non CKD anemia. I don't see them having an immediate and costless exit.
Dumping the US rights looked like an obvious decision, and trying to use the material breach clause to accelerate the termination tells me they thought International was obvious as well, in spite of applications in process at EMA and elsewhere.
Complete write-off. I haven't found Vada sales numbers by MTPC in Japan (haven't looked that hard) but they haven't been good enough to make them easy to find.
Yeah, they were off about 20% but that is only about a dime, so....
As an afterthought - it remains to be seen what Astra does with the US rights for Roxa. Doing well in China and Astellas is getting approvals in it's territories.
BHVN
Sheep of Wall Street
@Biohazard3737
Hope Favus' track record holds with $BHVN.
Remember his calls on $GWPH and $IMMU very well before they were acquired at unbelievable premiums.
10:25 AM · Apr 28, 2022·Twitter Web App
AMRN
Is the company viable at all with the IP they have? Seems like they have had the short end of the stick from day one.
Indeed.
Price is down another ~20% from the point you questioned the enterprise value.
One could make the argument that the current share price is largely being supported by short covering. It had been a very popular short. I'm now seeing borrow available.
I think you may have missed looking at the actual data that AKBA presented. Whatever class effect there may be, AKBA and FGEN shared specific issues.
I have no opinion on the GSK drug.
The point had to do with the process of analysis at a certain time window rather than a general dislike of of those companies at a random time, no matter who you choose to follow.
If the intent of your post was to say that no company needs to be invested in, perhaps I misunderstood by how it was written.
AKBA
What I found interesting is a subset of bio-twitter finding the FGEN CRL appropriate and/or expected which also thought AKBA had a reasonable chance at approval.
No matter what your feelings on the FGEN data set and the 'cleanliness' thereof - AKBA stood no chance.
"Paxlovid"
More substantial than the early August dissolution of a preclinical partnership.
Still, this indication was not in most sell-side models since it was perceived to be a long shot. So I don't know.
RVNC
Aren't these the kind of communications and operations issues that are best avoided as an investor?
Someone who has better knowledge in this area might chime in, but I didn't see anything resembling a three month fix in the FDA form.
The zebra has left the building?
That's a longer run thesis.
The next year++ can still have undesirable wrinkles.
How much should they be down on this preclinical collaboration?
Forgot to put (eom) on the last post.
Why would they do that if they were seeking (any) support for full approval based on the data?
Seems asking for support of conditional approval under those circumstances is contraindicated, even if it is sometimes done in other panels.
This dropped yesterday at 5:00 ET. I will thread details and my initial thoughts...https://t.co/5A2LuISCyK
— Daniel Coyne (@DrDanMO) April 7, 2021
The call was not good even in 'best light.'
The new CMO was in a tough spot to be sure, but did not handle the questions well.
I have seen many declarative statements on Twitter that are no more than speculation or educated guesses that nonetheless may be true.
The only thing that stands out in retrospect is Dr. Peony Yu had a larger or smaller part in it - but could not be the only person involved.