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.
nice finish today , last print 10,400 shares @ 16.53 up.97 today
Well, I had my mind made uo a while ago, Iam here for the long haul, not selling a drop right now
I might be streching it a bit, but i think if phase 2 is good, right to $30 to $35
Sarepta Therapeutics Looks Highly Undervalued
September 28, 2012 | 4 commentsby: Sean Anderson | about: SRPT R.S. Analytics wrote up the long case for Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT) earlier this month here. I agree with that thesis, and won't bore everyone by repeating it here since R.S. did such a great job telling it already. There are, however, a few points that I'd like to expand on.
In particular, I think that SRPT's lead drug candidate, eteplirsen, for the treatment of one form of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and the related developmental pipeline has a very high chance of successful approval by the FDA.
While most analysts who cover the stock basically agree regarding the likelihood of FDA approval, their valuations all strike me as extraordinarily conservative. On a risk-adjusted basis (as I discuss below), I think the company is worth between $44.50 and $47.50 per share. It is hard for me to see how the stock should trade anywhere below $30.00, yet analyst price targets range from $9.00 to $26.00, and the stock closed today at $15.06 as I write this. So I think the stock is extraordinarily cheap right now.
I expect, based on preliminary results from a Phase IIb study and some extraordinary statements from the families of half of the patients treated in that study, that final study results to be presented in October (though the company could release top-line results any day) will act as a catalyst to realize some of this hidden value.
The Case For Eteplirsen
Eteplirsen is a treatment that has just completed a Phase IIb study for the treatment one group of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) patients, those who have genetic defects in what is known as exon 51.
I'll go through the results of the study in a little more detail below, but the high-level overview is that, while the study was small (8 patients on the drug, including 6 who completed the study, and four patients in the control group), the results after 36 weeks of the 48 week trial showed a large and statistically significant improvement in the ability of patients to walk. In addition, results from biopsy at 24 weeks demonstrated that eteplirsen does cause muscle fibers to make dystrophin, the protein that is missing in DMD patients, and there appear to be no adverse side effects.
Most impressive of all, however, are the stories from the parents of three of the six patients who received the drug and completed the study discussing dramatic improvements in the mobility and quality of life of their children. This is a disease where patients simply don't get better without treatment, yet we have three whose improvement was remarkable enough for their families to speak out.
The study included 4 boys receiving a 50 mg/kg dose of eteplirsen, four receiving a 30 mg/kg dose, and four in the placebo control group (though the four in the control group began receiving eteplirsen after 24 weeks). All were between 7 and 13 years old at entry into the study, and all group assignments were double blinded until at least 24 weeks. Two of the patients in the 30 mg/kg group experienced rapid progression of their disease shortly after the trial began, were unable to walk at all after 24 weeks, and are therefore excluded from the 36-week analysis.
On average, patients could walk 396 meters in six minutes when they entered the study. The control and 50 mg/kg groups both experienced marginal decreases in walk test performance after 12 weeks (an average decline of around 4 meters). After 24 weeks, the 50 mg/kg treatment group average score equaled its score at the beginning of the test, versus a 28 meter decrease in the control group. At week 32, the 50 mg/kg group's average score fell by 3 meters from the start of the trial, versus a 63 meter average decline in performance of the control group. By week 36, the 50 mg/km group score fell an average of 9 meters, versus an average decline of 78 meters in the control group. The 32 and 36 week scores were both statistically significant. The two boys remaining in the 30 mg/kg group experienced a decline of around 43 meters from their initial scores, still well below the control group's 78 meter average decline, but not statistically significant.
The bear case seems to focus on the small sample size. Of course, more data is always preferable to less data, but the fact that the trial reached statistical significance with such a small sample size speaks to the large difference in performance between the treatment and control groups. Nevertheless, the criticism that the control group performance simply may not adequately reflect the normal progression of DMD, thus skewing the results, is a reasonable consideration in interpreting these results. The release of the data from the 48-week study should go a considerable way toward resolving the current uncertainty.
Second, eteplirsen-treated patients showed dystrophin (the protein that is missing in DMD patients) in their muscle fibers at the 24 week look, whereas placebo-treated patients did not (there was no 36 week biopsy, though there will be biopsy results at 48 weeks). Had we not seen dystrophin production, I would have written off the walk test results as a statistical fluke despite their high significance. At the same time, the presence of the protein alone isn't sufficient in my view to show that the drug is an effective treatment, since what's important is the presence of a functional version of the protein in the patient's muscle cells. The combination of the biopsy and the walking test results is much more impressive than either would be alone.
Third, there appeared to be no adverse side effects from treatment. The other exon 51-skipping treatment in development, by Prosensa's (licensed to GlaxoSmithKline) appears to cause proteinurea (proteins in the urine). While proteinurea is a small problem compared to DMD, the data so far give eteplirsen the edge in safety considerations.
Finally, we have impressive anecdotal evidence from study participants. Of the six patients receiving treatment, the families of three have gone public with their stories of how their children improved dramatically while on the trial. I'd encourage everyone looking at Sarepta to watch these news reports: Justin Trovillion, Billy Elsworth, and Max Leclaire.
Max's parents are the most outspoken of the three families that have come forward (they have another son with DMD whom they are desperate to get onto the drug after seeing Max's improvement. They've made some startling comments, such as "elevator stuck at school... max skipped down full flight of stairs, burst out doors while teachers stared in awe…. he almost doesn't remember why he uses an elevator (we still make him for safety)," and ""My husband noticed first at the airport…. He said, 'I think he's on the drug and a high dose.' Max opened one of the McDonald's milk jugs with the sealed top. He never had that sort of grip strength." Max's parents maintain Twitter feeds (here and here) that you might want to read to get a better feel for their impressions.
I have never seen a trial where one half of the treatment group has gone public discussing the improvement in the patient's lives. Sarepta, as you can see from the company's letter to parents, is not looking for publicity among parents because the company doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to start a compassionate use program. My bottom line is that DMD patients over seven years of age simply do not get better, and here we have three out of six whose families have made their improvement public. The comments that R.S. cited from Jerry Mendell (quoted in this Nature editorial), the principal investigator (and a well respected scientist who does not work for Sarepta and is putting his reputation on the line) that he saw "an unprecedented treatment effect" in the study back this up.
The Catalyst
The investigators will present results from the full 48-weeks of the study at the World Muscle Society Congress in Australia, which runs from October 9 through October 13. They have submitted a placeholder abstract without data, and Sarepta management has indicated that Saturday, October 13 is the likely date of the talk. Given the importance of these results to the company, it's likely that the company will release the top-line numbers in a press release before the meeting. We could see this any day.
FDA Considerations
Assuming that the positive results from the 36-week look hold up in the 48-week results, which I think is very likely given the information we've seen so far, Sarepta hopes to file a new drug application seeking approval from the FDA to market the drug based on the results of the Phase IIb study. They will discuss this with the FDA staff at the end of study meeting that should take place later this year. If the FDA indicates that it would review eteplirsen on the basis of the Phase IIb data, then we would likely have a decision from the FDA late in late 2013. If not, then the NDA will have to wait until Sarepta runs a Phase III trial, which would push a decision off by a little more than a year. Note that, even if Sarepta files an NDA using the Phase IIb results, under FDA guidelines they will still need to conduct a confirmatory Phase III trial.
So - again, assuming the study results hold up after 48 weeks - will the FDA review eteplirsen based on very good results from a single, small trial? There is no doubt, the FDA likes all of the data that it can get, and, for most drugs, requires at least one positive phase III trials before approval. The small sample size in Sarepta's current trial is a strong factor militating against approval without an additional study. Nevertheless, assuming the 48 week data confirms the positive results seen at 36 weeks, I think the FDA will review eteplirsen on the results of the Phase IIb trial, for several reasons:
First, as discussed above, the results are dramatic.
Second, there is no other effective treatment for these patients, who suffer rapid declines in function and early mortality. The FDA also recognizes that, given the cost constraints, it needs to evaluate drugs for rare conditions based on reduced data sets. A few examples of FDA approval based on small studies are the approval of Alexion's Soliris for a second condition based on 13 patients and the approval of Novartis's Afinitor for tuberous sclerosis based on positive results in nine patients in a 28-patient open label study.
Third, as R.S. pointed out, Congress has taken action in this year in the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act and the Creating Hope Act to encourage the development of new treatments for rare diseases and for childhood diseases. Both acts had strong bipartisan support.
Fourth, my firm's diligence suggests that physicians who treat muscular dystrophy are enthusiastic about being able to prescribe eteplirsen. This is usually a pretty good indicator of how the FDA will react.
Fifth, diligence also indicates strong support in the muscular dystrophy parent community, which is small but well organized, for an early review (if you want to see why, just watch the patient videos from this trial above).
Sixth, the FDA will face considerable political pressure to act quickly. Remember, these are Jerry's kids. It's hard for me to think of a more sympathetic group than suffering and dying children, or a rare condition that has such a high public profile as muscular dystrophy. I'm a pretty cynical guy and a stickler for statistical purity at the FDA, and, even setting aside my firm's pecuniary interest, I still want these patients to have the treatment option as soon as possible.
Finally, given the the absence of adverse side effects in the Phase IIb study, there seems to be little risk that eteplirsen will harm patients who receive it.
The only real downside to an early review by the FDA is that, if the drug is approved, ethical considerations would make it impossible for the Phase III study to have a placebo control arm (there will be a confirmatory Phase III study even if the FDA indicates that it will review eteplirsen based on the Phase IIb results). This is less of a concern in a DMD study than it is in most other conditions, since the prognosis for patients is uniformly bleak, and therefore it should be obvious from a single arm study whether eteplirsen is effective.
While I would still be a bull if I thought that the FDA would definitely require a Phase III study before review (and my valuation, below, does not assume an early review), I think the prospects for FDA review next year are strong.
Valuation
For the most part, the analysts who cover Sarepta and I are on the same page regarding the likelihood that eteplirsen will ultimately be approved (and will be approved on an expedited basis by the FDA). In my opinion, however, their valuations are well below where the market values a company with a drug that shows the potential of eteplirsen.
There are around 12,000 DMD patients in the United States. Of these, around 13% have defects in exon 51, the genetic defect that eteplirsen treats, or around 1,560 US patients. Once approved, I'd expect eteplirsen to penetrate about 70% of that market, or around 1,092 patients per year.
Analysts speculate that eteplirsen will be priced between $250,000 and $450,000 annually. This is consistent with the experience of Alexion (ALXN), which sells its Soliris treatment for neuromyelitis optica, another rare disorder, for $500,000. Using a base case of $350,000, that gets us to peak sales in the US of just over $327 million. Note that this does not take into consideration the possibility that eteplirsen will significantly prolong the lifespan of DMD patients, who typically die by their mid-20s; if the drug does increase lifespans, then the number of patients alive at any given time will increase).
Sarepta is currently in preclinical studies to use the same technology for exon 45 and exon 50 defects, which together are about as prevalent as are exon 51 defects. The company estimates that 85% of DMD patients could ultimately benefit from exon-skipping technology, which accords with my understanding of the mechanisms of DMD (if anyone is interested in discussing this further, leave a comment and I can go into the science in detail). While there are several steps from pre-clinical studies to a marketed drug, conceptually there is very little difference among the different genetic defects that lead to DMD, so a technology that helps patients with an exon 51 defect should be adaptable to others.
Finally, investors need to consider sales outside the US. Although Sarepta still has an appeal available, the European Patent Office has upheld Prosena's patent for exon-skipping treatments for exon 51 and 46 in DMD, which could prevent marketing eteplirsen in Western Europe.
Taking it all together, assuming that the technology that underlies eteplirsen is effective as it appears to be from the Phase IIb results we've seen so far, it's hard for me to see how peak sales for Serepta's DMD program would fall below $1.0 billion per year.
Alexion is a good example of a similar company that is around three years ahead of where Sarepta is now (four years if the FDA requires a Phase III study before reviewing eteplirsen), with one approved product and several strong candidates in the near-term pipeline for rare diseases. Analysts projections for peak sales for Alexion cluster around $2.5 billion per year. With a $21.6 billion market cap, this works out to a current price of 8.65 times peak sales.
Giving Sarepta the Alexion multiple on $1.0 billion of peak sales would value Sarepta around $8.7 billion. Of course, we need to discount this. Using a 20% discount rate and assuming that Sarepta is four years behind Alexion, that values Sarepta's DMD program around $4.2 billion. We need to take a further haircut to reflect the increased approval uncertainty, since Alexion has one approved drug versus none so far for Sarepta. That's an art rather than a science, but let's set that at 2/3. This values Sarepta's DMD program around $1.4 billion.
An alternate comparable is Synageva Biopharma (GEVA), which is developing an enzyme replacement therapy for the treatment of two rare diseases, lysosomal acid lipase deficiency and cholesteryl ester storage disease. As with Serepta, Synageva has no currently approved product, but has presented very promising results from a small Phase II study (they will begin their Phase III late this year or early next year), with a pipeline of other compounds and an interesting drug development platform. Analysts put peak sales for their lead product in the $1.0 billion per year range. With Sarepta looking at a potential market about the same size, with a similar probability for regulatory success, and discounting by one year at 20% (on the assumption that Sarepta needs to do a Phase III study before FDA review), that puts the value of Sarepta's DMD program at 83% of Synageva's $1.3 billion market cap, or $1.1 billion.
We need to be a little careful with Sarepta's capital structure, because the company has issued warrants in several financings. There are 22.6 million shares outstanding, plus options and warrants to purchase another 7.0 million shares, so the diluted share count is 29.6 million shares. So I value the company's DMD program at just over $40.00 per share using ALXN as a comp and just over $37.00 when comparing to GEVA. Biomarin Pharmaceuticals (BMRN) is the other obvious rare disease comparable, but it's much harder to do a direct comparison to Sarepta, given Biomarin's licensing agreements and its development relationship with Sanofi-Aventis.
On top of this, we need to add the roughly $50 million that Sarepta will receive upon the exercise of options and warrants, the value of the exon-skipping development program outside DMD (my estimate is $100 million, the value of given the promise that it has shown in DMD). The value of the rest of the company is small compared to my view of the value in the DMD program, but the company's market capitalization of around $80 million before we saw the 36 month DMD results is a decent proxy, less around $10 million for cash burn since then, and less another $20 million to reflect uncertainty from the Department of Defense stop work order in the company's Ebola program.
Finally, if the FDA approves eteplirsen, the company probably will receive a transferable priority review voucher from the FDA, which would accelerate FDA review of one drug by four months. While this would have limited value in Sarepta's hands, an additional four months of sales of a blockbuster drug on patent would have real value. I've seen some speculation that this could be worth around $100 million, but, given that nobody has traded one of these vouchers yet, I'm much more conservative, putting a $25 million value on this. That's $225 million on top of the value of the DMD program, or $7.60 per diluted share, giving me a total valuation of $44.50 to $47.50 per share for Sarepta.
Risks to My Thesis
Any of the following would make me reconsider my analysis:
(1) 48-week results that do not live up to my expectations based on what we've seen so far in the Phase IIb trial and the public statements from the families.
(2) Negative comments from the company following the end-of-study meeting with the FDA.
(3) Pushback from payors regarding price (but ask yourself this-would you want to be the Scrooge insurance company that forces children to stay in wheelchairs?)
(4) Strong positive results from Prosena's competing product.
(5) Adverse intellectual property developments.
In addition, there is no doubt that Sarepta will need to raise additional money to continue its research and development, including the funding of a Phase III study for eteplirsen. If the final Phase IIb data is good, I would expect the company to raise capital after that data is released (and I don't think they would have any difficulty doing that).
The company also has an at-the-market equity offering (ATM) agreement in place to sell up to $40 million of stock through Citadel. Citadel's advertised trading as a percentage of volume hasn't gone up since the company signed the ATM agreement in early September, and I have no other reason to believe that the company has issued any stock under the ATM, so I assume that the company has not yet issued any stock under the program. While the ATM would only cover a few day's volume, it is still an overhang, with the possibility that Citadel might sell stock into any bump up in the stock price.
While I do not expect the market to suddenly converge to my valuation, I hope that the upcoming release of the final Phase IIb results will cause investors to give more consideration to the relative valuation of Sarepta's DMD program.
Recent Weakness
Sarepta is trading down about a dollar from its September 18 price. I suspect the decline relates to the registration statement the company filed on September 19, registering the just under 5 million warrants outstanding. Since the company is quite straightforward in its reporting of outstanding options and warrants, this shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone. In any event, I have always had the warrants built into my model. If I'm correct about this, then the decline from the registration of the warrant stock should be transient.
The stock suffered a similar fall early this month, after the ATM program announcement. Although the overhang from this program, and the need to raise additional capital, is real, the company's capital needs are also clear to anyone who has followed the story.
Please Tell Me Why I'm Wrong
This is the first stock I've written about on Seeking Alpha. While my excitement is genuine, I'm always open to the possibility that I'm missing something important, particularly where a stock is trading well below half of what I think it is worth. It seems to me that the analyst community, while it recognizes the potential of eteplirsin, is extraordinarily conservative in their valuation, perhaps because they simply don't want to get too far ahead of the market. I would be very grateful if any bears would let me know why you think I'm wrong. In return, I'll be happy to answer any questions left in the comments either about the science or my analysis.
Form 8-K for SAREPTA THERAPEUTICS, INC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27-Sep-2012
Regulation FD Disclosure
Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure
As previously reported, on August 2, 2012, the Company received a stop-work order from the U.S. Department of Defense (the "DoD") with respect to the Ebola portion of the contract for Advanced Development of Hemorrhagic Fever Virus Therapeutics (the "ADHFVT contract"). The original stop-work order was in effect through September 1, 2012 and was extended by the DoD until September 30, 2012. On September 27, 2012, the Company received notice from the DoD that the stop-work order would be extended until October 31, 2012. At or prior to that time the DoD will either: (1) terminate the Ebola portion of the contract;
(2) cancel the stop-work order; or (3) again extend the stop-work order period. The lower end of the Company's previously issued annual 2012 revenue guidance range assumes no additional revenue from the Ebola portion of the ADHFVT contract in 2012. The information in this Item 7.01 is furnished to, but not filed with, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
This Current Report on Form 8-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are identified by such words as "anticipate," "believe," "expect," "will" and words of similar import and are based on current expectations that involve risks and uncertainties, such as the Company's plans, objectives, expectations and intentions. All statements other than historical or current facts are forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements about the Company's ability to prepare for larger scale production of drug related materials. These forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update its forward-looking statements based on events or circumstances after the date hereof.
with how great this stock is doing, I cant believe how this board draws no interest
Jim Cramers and Sarepta in Lighting round, Video
Video
Sarepta Therapeutics Inc. (SRPT) UBS Global Life Sciences Conference Call September 20, 2012 4:00 PM ET
six page transcript
On Tuesday, Sarepta Therapeutics (Nasdaq: SRPT ) announced that the Food and Drug Administration had approved fast-track status for the company's Ebola and Marburg drugs. The two are Sarepta's leading infectious disease drug candidates, so this would seem to be good news for the company. As always, though, the devil is in the details, so let's look a little more closely at this story.
Deadly serious
Public health officials frequently describe Ebola as the most frightening disease of our time. It kills 90% of infected people, and a large proportion of those tend to be health care workers who are exposed to it when trying to help others. It is an excruciating way to die. To date, no one really knows the origins of the disease, nor how it first appears in previously unexposed regions.
Marburg is a cousin virus to Ebola and has similar characteristics in all the respects I cover in this article, except that Ebola is the more deadly of the two. I will therefore confine my discussion to Ebola, but the dynamics are essentially the same for both diseases.
Just as medical workers finally succeeded in containing a deadly outbreak in Uganda, a new outbreak recently appeared 500 miles away in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Did the virus travel between the two sites? If so, how? No one knows, but it certainly raises the specter of a leap to other continents. What if Ebola stowed away on a plane bound for the U.S.? While the likelihood of such a jump is low, it remains a concern for experts.
There is precedent for this in non-human primates. In 1989, a shipment of monkeys destined for lab testing at a Covance (NYSE: CVD ) (then known as Hazleton) facility in Reston, Va., turned out to be infected with Ebola, setting off a panic among public health officials. The outbreak was contained and never jumped to humans, but it remains a cautionary tale.
Bioterrorism
Perhaps a greater worry, though, is Ebola's potential for use as a weapon. The U.S. Department of Defense and the National Institutes of Health certainly seem to perceive this threat: They funded millions of dollars of Sarepta's research. So why on Earth did they issue a stop-work order on this research in August, and what implications might that have for Sarepta?
The DoD has been extraordinarily tight-lipped about its suspension of funding for this research. A defense department spokeswoman said it would "evaluate each contractor's efforts independently to determine the plan for moving forward with the development of the best drug candidate possible." This may be a good time to mention that Sarepta is not the only game in town.
Competitive landscape
Tekmira Pharmaceuticals is also working on a drug. Both were receiving DoD funding, and both had begun clinical trials.
There are some other pursuits to find a treatment for Ebola. MAP Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: MAPP ) is hard at work on an Ebola therapy, and -- until the stop-work order -- was also receiving funding from the DoD. Novartis (NYSE: NVS ) has found that two of its leukemia drugs are effective in killing the Ebola virus in a laboratory environment, but much more work will be required to determine if this can evolve into a viable treatment.
It might seem that a vaccine and a treatment would be complementary, but they could actually be competitors in this landscape. Consider the signals: The DoD is the primary research-funding source, and big pharma has to date shown no interest. The DoD spokeswoman's statement would seem to indicate that the DoD is now looking to limit funding to the most promising candidate(s).
On the question of prevention versus treatment, we should consider the disease mechanics, as they are currently understood. Several small companies are making progress on developing a treatment for Ebola. The problem is that the most promising treatments in the pipeline would need to be administered within 24 to 48 hours of exposure, which is well before symptoms appear. Current diagnostic tests, such as those produced by Merck KGaA's (OTC: MKGAY) EMD Millipore unit, are not readily available in the regions where Ebola currently exists. So by the time anybody realizes that there's an outbreak, it would be too late.
A vaccine, then, would appear to be the more promising route at this point, but whom do we inoculate? We still don't know how the disease spreads in the first place. It would be enormously expensive to launch a universal vaccination program, and because the disease incidence is still so limited, it seems unlikely that money would appear for this. At the very least, though, a vaccine could confer extraordinary benefit to health care workers in the regions of the world where the disease appears. My money is, therefore, on the vaccine.
If the DoD is trying to pick a winner, the FDA may have just done it for them. The fast-track approval is a vote of confidence in Sarepta's approach, and will provide the company an advantage going forward. It's a gamble, but I think Sarepta is going to come out ahead here.
Foolish bottom line
There are no guarantees in the world of biotechnology and pharmaceutical development. Still, my bet is that all things considered, the future looks bright for Sarepta's drug and for the poor souls out there who haven't been infected with Ebola -- yet. Of course, when looking at Sarepta as a stock, potential investors need to understand that most of the optimism around the company relates to its treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, a topic that Fool contributor Keith Speights dove into earlier this month.
If you're hungry for some great investment prospects outside of health care, you should treat yourself to our special free report, "Middle-Class Millionaire-Makers: 3 Stocks Wall Street's Too Rich to Notice." Inside you'll learn about a few companies riding simple, yet effective, business models to great success. Click here now to claim your copy.
wow a little action today, yes just a little
Sarepta Therapeutics to Present Company Overview at the 2012 UBS Global Life Sciences Conference
Webcast Accessible via Sarepta Therapeutics Website
Press Release: Trade Shows/Seminars/Webinars – 4 hours ago.. .
.
CAMBRIDGE, MA--(Marketwire - Sep 13, 2012) - Sarepta Therapeutics ( NASDAQ : SRPT ), a developer of innovative RNA-based therapeutics, announced today that it is scheduled to present at the 2012 UBS Global Life Sciences Conference in New York, NY on Thursday, September 20, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Chris Garabedian, Sarepta's President and CEO, will be the presenter.
The presentation will be webcast live under the events section of Sarepta Therapeutics' website at www.sareptatherapeutics.com and will be archived there following the presentation for 90 days. Please connect to Sarepta's website several minutes prior to the start of the broadcast to ensure adequate time for any software download that may be necessary.
About Sarepta Therapeutics
Sarepta's Selling -- Should You Be Buying?
By Keith Speights | More Articles
September 6, 2012 | Comments (0)
SRPTSarepta Ther
CAPS Rating 1/5 Stars.
$14.55 $-0.99 (-6.37%)
+ Watch SRPT
on My Watchlist
More about SRPT
5 of Last Week's Biggest Winners
5 of Last Week's Biggest Winners
BROWSE ALL SRPT ARTICLES
Watch stocks you care about
The single, easiest way to keep track of all the stocks that matter...
Your own personalized stock watchlist!
It's a 100% FREE Motley Fool service...
Click Here Now
Sarepta Therapeutics (Nasdaq: SRPT ) announced an at-the-market equity offering sales agreement with Citadel Securities on Tuesday. Under the terms of the agreement, the company can offer and sell up to $40 million of its common stock.
With Sarepta selling (or at least clearing the way to sell), is now a good time for investors to buy? Let's take a look.
Buy?
The single most compelling reason to buy Sarepta is the promise of its eteplirsen drug in treating Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD. There are currently no disease-modifying therapies available for the condition.
Eteplirsen shows great potential for treating DMD. Sarepta announced positive results in April from its phase 2b clinical trial. The study found that the drug produced consistent levels of dystrophin, the protein needed for muscular function that is lacking in patients with DMD.
In July, the company announced even better news. Treatment with eteplirsen over a 36-week period achieved significant clinical benefits for patients. Dr. Jerry Mendell, director of the centers for gene therapy and muscular dystrophy at Nationwide Children's Hospital and principle investigator of the phase 2b study, stated that eteplirsen was "the most promising advance to treat the underlying cause of muscular dystrophy I've seen in my more than 30 years in the field."
How big is the potential DMD market? The disease affects an estimated 8,000 boys and young men in the U.S., with 400 to 600 more new diagnoses each year.
Drugs for other rare diseases generate revenue exceeding hundreds of thousands of dollars per patient annually. Vertex Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: VRTX ) charges nearly $300,000 per patient per year for its Kalydeco drug, used in the treatment of a rare form of cystic fibrosis.
Cerezyme, a drug used to treat type 1 Gaucher disease, falls in the same ballpark. Genzyme, a business unit of Sanofi (NYSE: SNY ) , has charged more than $300,000 per patient per year for the drug. That price looks practically cheap compared with the $400,000 price tag for Soliris, the blood disease drug sold by Alexion Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: ALXN ) .
Sarepta might not be able to charge at the levels of these other drugs, but potential sales for eteplirsen could still be large if things go well. One analyst estimates the market could exceed $600 million annually in the U.S. alone.
Bye?
We can certainly make a case for passing on Sarepta as an investment, though. For one thing, the stock has soared nearly 300% since July. Maybe, just maybe, it's time for a breather.
The company (formerly known as AVI BioPharma) has been in business since 1980. During its 32-year history, Sarepta amassed losses topping $319 million yet never generated any material revenue from product sales. That's a long dry spell.
Sarepta obtains nearly all of its revenue from contract work for the U.S. government. The bad news on that front is that the company completed all of its contracts in June except for one agreement to develop therapeutics against Ebola and Marburg viruses. In August, the government sent a stop-work order on the Ebola portion of this contract.
The loss of these contracts, with their accompanying revenue, explains why Sarepta is looking to get some more cash via sale of its stock.
The risk also exists that Sarepta could stumble in a clinical trial or that another company gains headway. GlaxoSmithKline (NYSE: GSK ) is one potential rival. It partners with Prosensa in DMD drug development.
Bide?
Cautious investors might want to simply bide their time for now. The company expects to release additional results at the 48-week mark from its open label extension study in October. It also plans to initiate enrollment of a phase 3 trial in late 2013.
Waiting to find out the October results and give the stock a little time to consolidate gains could be a prudent approach.
Back to buy
My take, though, is that buying a modest position in Sarepta now makes sense. This position could then be increased if the company announces good news in October and with its phase 3 trial.
Sarepta appears to be ahead of every other player in the largely untapped muscular dystrophy field. The huge run-up in the stock over the past few months could just be the beginning.
If you're looking for other pharma investing ideas, check out The Motley Fool's new premium report on Arena Pharmaceuticals. In this report, you'll learn about Arena's key opportunities and risks as it looks to capitalize on a huge market for its obesity drug. It also comes with a full year of analyst updates, so click here to get your copy now!
Awesome news
JPM-TMT Awards New Contract to Study Administration using Marburg Virus Drug
Last update: 9/6/2012 9:58:00 AM
FORT BELVOIR, Va., Sept. 6, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. Will Investigate feasibility of Delivery via Intramuscular Route
A contract to evaluate an alternative method for delivering a medical countermeasure (MCM) was awarded to Sarepta Therapeutics by the Joint Project Manager Transformational Medical Technologies (JPM-TMT). A component of the Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO-CBD), JPM-TMT has made significant progress in the development of a therapeutic to fight the highly lethal Marburg virus. During the course of developing the drug candidate thus far, the intravenous (IV) method of delivery is being utilized. This new $3.9 million contract will evaluate the feasibility of an intramuscular (IM) route, a more practical administration of a drug.
John Anderson, Product Manager of JPM-TMT's Hemorrhagic Fever Virus-Therapeutics Medical Countermeasures acquisition program, commented on the development of the drug candidate. "With AVI-7288 showing survival rates up to four days post infection, we are eager to determine whether it is feasible to deliver a drug intramuscularly--a route that could reduce the logistical burden of administering the medical countermeasure to our Warfighter. IM delivery is both easier and quicker to administer. The IV route takes up to one hour while IM administration takes just seconds. The potential for efficient treatment in a mass casualty situation is obvious."
There is no treatment for infection caused by Marburg virus, a member of the Filoviridae family of Hemorrhagic Fever Viruses (HFV). The disease is characterized by high fever, chills, nausea, vomiting, chest pain, diarrhea, and in some cases, massive hemorrhaging and organ dysfunction.
"Developing a treatment for the highly lethal Marburg virus infection is ground-breaking," said David E. Hough, Joint Project Manager for JPM-TMT. "JPM-TMT is the only U.S. government agency testing a post-exposure drug candidate against this dangerous disease. Our goal is to successfully develop a therapeutic for the Marburg virus infection using platform technologies that will ultimately have the capacity to rapidly respond to outbreaks of all HFVs as well as other biological pathogens. Both our Warfighters and the nation stand to benefit from our unique approach."
Joint Project Manager Transformational Medical Technologies (JPM-TMT)
JPM-TMT is a component of the U.S. Department of Defense's Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO-CBD). JPM-TMT aims to protect the Warfighter from emerging infectious diseases, genetically altered, and unknown biological threats. Through strategic investments and partnerships with innovative biotech firms, pharmaceutical corporations, other government agencies, and academic institutions, JPM-TMT facilitates the advanced development and acquisition of adaptable platform technologies, broad-spectrum medical countermeasures, and innovative systems to enhance our nation's biodefense response capability. For more information, visit .
SOURCE Joint Project Manager Transformational Medical Technologies
Copyright (C) 2012 PR Newswire. All rights reserved
lots of buying today, 3 mill in 15 mins, what going on????
CIRM awards Nelson/Miceli/SRPT $6 mil grant on reconsideration
Sarepta Therapeutics Announces Presentation at the 52nd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC) Annual Meeting
Press Release: Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. – 3 minutes 6 seconds agoEmailShare0PrintCompanies:Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.RELATED QUOTESSymbol Price Change
SRPT 14.92
CAMBRIDGE, MA--(Marketwire -09/05/12)- Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT), a developer of innovative RNA-based therapeutics, announced today that the Company's therapeutic candidate AVI-7288 for the treatment of Marburg virus will be featured in a presentation at the 52nd Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC) Annual Meeting taking place September 9-12, 2012 in San Francisco, CA.
Patrick Iversen, Ph.D., Senior Vice President of Research and Innovation at Sarepta Therapeutics, will deliver a poster presentation titled "AVI-7288 Provides Significant Survival Benefit When Administered up to Four Days After Marburg Virus Infection in Cynomolgus Macaques" at 11:15 a.m. PDT on Monday, September 10, 2012 during poster session 097, called New Antiviral Agents.
The presentation will be posted on the Sarepta Therapeutics website in the "Events & Presentations" section after the session is completed.
About Marburg Viruses
Marburg hemorrhagic fever is a severe and potentially fatal disease in humans first recognized in 1967. It is caused by an RNA virus of the Filoviridae family and is understood to be endemic to Africa. The Marburg virus is classified as a Category A bioterrorism agent by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, and was determined to pose a material threat to national security and public health by the Secretary of Homeland Security in 2006. Onset of the disease is often sudden, and the symptoms include fever, chills, nausea, vomiting, chest pain and diarrhea. Increasingly severe symptoms may also include massive hemorrhaging and multiple organ dysfunctions. There are currently no treatments for Marburg virus infection beyond supportive care.
Sarepta Therapeutics Announces At-the-Market Equity Offering
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (MM) (NASDAQ:SRPT)
Intraday Stock Chart
Today : Tuesday 4 September 2012
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: SRPT), a developer of innovative RNA-based therapeutics, entered into an At-the-Market (ATM) equity offering sales agreement with Citadel Securities LLC on September 4, 2012, under which Sarepta may, from time to time, offer and sell shares of its common stock having an aggregate value of up to $40 million through Citadel. Sarepta expects to use any proceeds from this offering for general corporate purposes, including the continued development of eteplirsen and other product candidates.
Under the ATM equity offering sales agreement, sales of common stock, if any, through Citadel, will be made by means of ordinary brokers' transactions, in privately negotiated transactions, or otherwise, at market prices prevailing at the time of sales, prices related to prevailing market prices or negotiated prices.
The common stock will be offered under the company's existing effective shelf registration statement (including a prospectus) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. A prospectus supplement related to the offering has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Any offer, solicitation or sale will be made only by means of the prospectus supplement and the accompanying prospectus. Current and potential investors should read the prospectus in the registration statement, and the prospectus supplement relating to the at-the-market offering and other documents the company has filed with the SEC for more complete information about Sarepta and the at-the-market offering program.
A copy of the prospectus supplement and accompanying prospectus relating to these securities may be obtained by contacting Citadel Securities LLC, 601 Lexington Avenue, 28th Floor, New York, NY 10003, or by calling 212-651-7651, or 877-219-5193 (toll free).
This press release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor may there be any sale of Sarepta's common stock in any state or jurisdiction in which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities law of any state or jurisdiction.
yes just reading that, awesome news, they know what they have, when its released, it will be big
Sarepta Therapeutics: Contract Is With U.S. Department Of Defense's Joint Project Manager Transformational Medical Technologies Program
Last update: 9/4/2012 8:31:26 AM
Sarepta Therapeutics Awarded $3.9 M Contract By U.S. Government To Evaluate Feasibility Of An Alternate Route Of Admin Of Its Lead Therapeutic Candidate For Treatment Of Marburg Virus
Sarepta Therapeutics - Pressure Mounting For Accelerated FDA Approval For Eteplirsen
September 3, 2012 | 2 commentsby: R.S. Analytics | about: SRPT ...More »Sarepta Therapeutics (SRPT), formerly known as AVI BioPharma, is closing in on a significant medical breakthrough for the largest segment of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy sufferers. Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy is an affliction that results in muscle degeneration and certain early death. It affects mostly boys with most sufferers wheelchair dependent by age 12 and a life expectancy of 25 years. There is no known cure for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.
Sarepta is developing Eteplirsen, an antisense oligonucleotide, that is designed to cause the skipping of exon 51 of the dystrophin gene in boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. About 13% of boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy have a mutation on the exon 51 of the dystrophin gene that causes this important muscle protein to go missing.
Sarepta's stock has been on a tear the last five weeks going from around $4 per share on July 23rd and closing at $15.82 August 31. The catalyst for this move was Sarepta's release of 36-week data of their current phase IIb extension study that, according to Sarepta's CEO Chris Garabedian, showed "statistically significant clinical benefit" in the 6 minute walk test - which is a "clinical meaningful outcome measure" for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.
I won't be going into detail on the data - you can read about that in Sarepta's 36-week clinical results call here. However, I will add that the lead investigator for the trial is Dr. Jerry Mendell, who is the director of the Centers for Gene Therapy and Muscular Dystrophy at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, OH. Dr. Mendell stated Sarepta's drug had "an unprecedented treatment effect" on participants in its latest trial.
Sarepta plans to release the full 48-week trial results for the above referenced study in October. If the results are positive as expected, Sarepta will go for accelerated FDA approval. On July, 9, 2012, President Obama signed into law The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), S. 3187, bipartisan legislation that will spur the development of lifesaving treatments for 30 million Americans suffering from rare diseases. There is also the Creating Hope Act - "The Creating Hope Act will expand the priority review voucher program as incentive for pharmaceutical companies to formulate more pediatric drugs." In short, these vouchers can be worth in the hundreds of millions and are fully transferable to other companies (like a European or ROW partner for Sarepta). The timing couldn't be better for Sarepta to go for accelerated approval for Eteplirsen.
Adding to this excitement is the parents of some of the trial participants that have gone public with the remarkable improvements they are witnessing in their sons. This isn't data crunching and statistical "p" values - this is real life amazing results. Here is the heart-breaking story of two Vermont brothers - one who is getting Eteplirsen and the other who didn't qualify for the study because he is wheelchair dependent. Here is the story of a Missouri boy in the study that is showing remarkable improvements as well. The pressure will mount as more stories like this emerge.
In fact the news has been so positive for Eteplirsen that Sarepta has received numerous calls from families of afflicted children requesting the medication outside of trial for compassionate use. In this open letter from Sarepta's CEO Chris Garabedian, he sympathizes with those families, explains the process, and reiterates the company's commitment to get the drug to market as quickly as possible.
In terms of competition, so far Sarepta appears to have the best in class in terms of efficacy and safety. GSK/Prosensa is also developing an exon 51 gene skipping therapy (PRO051) and has a clinical trial going on in Europe. In terms of safety for PRO051 while no serious adverse events were reported, one concern would be that all of the patients in the phase 1-2a study showed protein in their urine (Proteinuria). "Proteinuria, defined as a protein level above the upper limit of the normal range of 0.15 g per liter, was observed in all 12 patients." That warrants further monitoring. Sarepta's safety profile is very clean and no adverse events were reported - nor was there any proteinuria which could portend kidney/renal toxicity issues.
Another issue that has come up is Intellectual Property. Sarepta challenged Prosensa's Exon Skipping IP in Europe and had some claims invalidated, but part of Prosensa's patent portfolio remained intact - this has not been challenged in European Court. Here in the United States, Sarepta's Exon Skipping IP is very strong and "includes exclusive rights to Dr. Ryszard Kole's general RNA splice altering patents gained though AVI's acquisition of Ercole Biotech" - Kole's IP is important and should be referenced in any of Prosensa's prior art submissions - I have not been able to confirm if they were referenced by Prosensa at the time of this writing.
So what is Sarepta worth? Currently, the market cap of Sarepta is approximately $358M. This is with 23M shares outstanding at $15.82 per share and $24.5M of cash as of the Q2 CC on August 10th. I believe, even with this latest run, the share price of Sarepta is still very undervalued. The cost of Eteplirsen is expected to be in the $250,000 to $400,000 per year range. Greg Wade a pharmaceutical analyst at Wedbush gives Sarepta a $26 per share target and estimates peak sales "conservatively" at $600M per year in just the United States. Sarepta also has many other programs, including anti-bacterials, flu, hemorrhagic viruses, and other exon skipping therapies. A $1B market cap would not be out of line for Sarepta - that puts it in the $40 - $50 price per share range and certainly seems appropriate given just the prospects for Eteplirsen alone.
An Open Letter from Chris Garabedian, President and CEO of Sarepta Therapeutics
On behalf of everyone at Sarepta Therapeutics, I wanted to provide you with an update on our clinical program for eteplirsen.
As many of you are aware, on July 24 we released interim data from our ongoing Phase IIb clinical trial of eteplirsen, which provided the first indication that eteplirsen may be having a favorable clinical impact in slowing the progression of the disease for a group of DMD patients with a genetic mutation that is addressable by exon 51 skipping.
Since that time, we have received numerous calls and emails for more information on the program, and especially, about the potential availability of eteplirsen outside of the current clinical trial. We wish to be as transparent as possible about what we are doing to bring eteplirsen to patients who would benefit from the therapy. We know that drug development is a painfully drawn-out process for those who are waiting, and we take seriously our responsibility to act as a true partner to the DMD community as we move forward together.
Since the moment that we saw the interim results last month, we have been working internally and with outside experts to determine the fastest path forward to make this drug more widely available. To do so, our primary focus as a company must be on completing the ongoing clinical trial and demonstrating the safety and efficacy of eteplirsen in a rigorous and convincing way that allows us to initiate discussions with regulators regarding our path forward to secure approval.
In October, we will be able to review and assess the Phase IIb 48-week data. Depending on the results, we will request a meeting with the FDA to determine what next steps will be required. Those discussions will determine what additional clinical trial or trials are needed, what the design of future trials will be, how many patients will participate, and what the makeup of the trial population will be.
At the same time, we must begin to scale up manufacturing of eteplirsen to support future clinical development beyond the current ongoing 12-patient trial. We are currently producing eteplirsen at a scale that is sufficient to meet the needs of the 12 patients in this study. We cannot produce enough eteplirsen to meet needs outside of this trial until we have substantially scaled up our production from current levels.
It is important to stress that eteplirsen is a truly novel type of medicine; the complexity of ramping up production on a larger scale will require a substantial investment of time, money and expertise in order to demonstrate to regulators that eteplirsen produced at a larger scale has the same characteristics and safety profile as what is currently being used in clinical trials. We have a plan in place to meet this challenge, but we must be thorough and methodical to ensure we are successful.
At the present time, we do not have excess drug supply to make eteplirsen available outside of a clinical trial setting on a compassionate use basis. We can only imagine how difficult this is to hear, but unfortunately we have no other options available to us right now. We must devote our resources to producing enough eteplirsen for our current and future clinical studies so that we can advance this therapy through the regulatory process and, ultimately, secure approval for all DMD patients who would benefit.
We fully understand that for the patients and families impacted by DMD, the pace of drug development can never be fast enough. We pledge to continue to advance eteplirsen through the clinical development process as rapidly and responsibly as possible, and to regularly update the DMD community on our progress to bring this promising therapy to the numerous children and young adults with DMD who so desperately need and deserve a safe and effective treatment option.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Chris Garabedian
President and CEO
Sarepta Therapeutics
I think with over the weekend, the anouncement should make for a great tuesday
up $1.85 pre-market, wow, whats going on
Sarepta Therapeutics to Present Company Overview at the Stifel Nicolaus 2012 Healthcare Conference
Date :
08/29/2012 @ 8:30AM
Source :
MarketWire
Stock :
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (MM) (SRPT)
Quote :
12.648 0.198 (1.59%) @ 10:03AM
<A TARGET="_blank" HREF="http://us-ads.openx.net/w/1.0/rc?cs=4f5941efcdffb&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE" ><img src="http://us-ads.openx.net/w/1.0/ai?auid=160609&cs=4f5941efcdffb&cb=INSERT_RANDOM_NUMBER_HERE" border="0" alt=""></a>
Sarepta Therapeutics to Present Company Overview at the Stifel Nicolaus 2012 Healthcare Conference
Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. (MM) (NASDAQ:SRPT)
Intraday Stock Chart
Today : Wednesday 29 August 2012
Sarepta Therapeutics (NASDAQ: SRPT), a developer of innovative RNA-based therapeutics, announced today that it is scheduled to present at the Stifel Nicolaus 2012 Healthcare Conference in Boston, MA on Wednesday, September 5, 2012 at 3:50 p.m. Eastern Time. Chris Garabedian, Sarepta's President and CEO, will be the presenter.
The presentation will be webcast live under the events section of Sarepta Therapeutics' website at www.sareptatherapeutics.com and will be archived there following the presentation for 90 days. Please connect to Sarepta's website several minutes prior to the start of the broadcast to ensure adequate time for any software download that may be necessary.
JUst hold on tight, $25 by year end
up .86 pre-market
Sarepta Therapeutics Started At Buy By ThinkEquity >SRPT
Last update: 8/27/2012 7:43:17 AM
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm as bugs says, thats it folks
A Little Life Today
Can u confirm Q2 next week, where did u see that
VERY well put chevy, iam waiting with ya, not going anywhere
awesome job Ei
Chevy I couldnt agree more, but i have to add one little thing. Thank you as well Mr. Chevy, You and Ei have dont another one well and I thank you for letting me ride your coat tails. The register rang and Thanks chevy and Ei.
UPDATE: PacWest Bancorp Makes $212M Unsolicited Bid For First California
Last update: 5/9/2012 8:00:16 AM
--PacWest offers to swap $7.25 of its stock for each First California share
--First California says PacWest wouldn't clarify terms, value of bid
--First California says PacWest wouldn't agree to non-exclusive talks
(Updated to include comments from First California beginning in the fourth paragraph)
By Melodie Warner
OF DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
PacWest Bancorp (PACW) made public its roughly $212 million all-stock bid to acquire First California Financial Group Inc. (FCAL) after the Westlake Village, Calif., bank-holding company rejected the proposal.
Los Angeles-based PacWest Bancorp said it offered to swap $7.25 of PacWest stock for each First California share, a 29% premium to its Tuesday close. First California stock is up 72% so far this year and was inactive in premarket trading.
PacWest said it sent the board a letter on May 3, seeking discussions of its proposal by Wednesday. The company decided to release its letter after First California decided not to proceed with "good faith" talks.
The parent of First California Bank on Wednesday said its board reviewed the proposal and sought PacWest's clarification of the terms and related matters. However, PacWest didn't provide what it considered satisfactory answers and refused to enter into a non-exclusive, nondisclosure agreement.
"The First California Board did not believe that it was in the best interests of stockholders to grant exclusivity to PacWest in the absence of satisfactory clarification of the terms and value of its proposal and taking into account the other strategic alternatives that First California may pursue, including discussions with third parties," the company said in a statement.
First California has 19 branches and nearly $2 billion in assets. The company reported last month its first-quarter profit dropped 11% from a year-earlier period that included an acquisition gain.
PacWest had $5.4 billion in assets as of March 31, and its Pacific Western Bank unit has 76 branches throughout California. In April, it reported a 51% drop in its first-quarter profit, due primarily to a debt-extinguishment charge.
PacWest shares closed Tuesday at $24.93 and were inactive premarket. The stock is up 32% since the beginning of the year.
-By Melodie Warner, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-2283; melodie.warner@dowjones.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 09, 2012 08:00 ET (12:00 GMT)
PacWest Bancorp Makes $212M Unsolicited Bid For First California
Last update: 5/9/2012 7:22:21 AM
DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
PacWest Bancorp (PACW) made public its roughly $212 million all-stock bid to acquire First California Financial Group Inc. (FCAL) after the Westlake Village, Calif., bank-holding company rejected the proposal.
Representatives for the parent of First California Bank weren't immediately available for comment.
Los Angeles-based PacWest Bancorp said it offered to swap $7.25 of PacWest stock for each First California share, a 29% premium to its Tuesday close. First California stock is up 72% so far this year and was inactive in premarket trading.
PacWest said it sent the board a letter on May 3, seeking discussions of its proposal by Wednesday. The company decided to release its letter after First California decided not to proceed with "good faith" talks.
First California has 19 branches and nearly $2 billion in assets. The company reported last month its first-quarter profit dropped 11% from a year-earlier period that included an acquisition gain.
PacWest had $5.4 billion in assets as of March 31, and its Pacific Western Bank unit has 76 branches throughout California. In April, it reported a 51% drop in its first-quarter profit, due primarily to a debt-extinguishment charge.
PacWest shares closed Tuesday at $24.93 and were inactive premarket. The stock is up 32% since the beginning of the year.
-By Melodie Warner, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-2283; melodie.warner@dowjones.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 09, 2012 07:22 ET (11:22 GMT)
I second that whitesnow
Thanks EI and Chevy for sharing all your DD on Dynamic Ventures, All your research is much appricated. once again we are here together for the long haul
thanks
damn did we think we would be in the red already?