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.
they have given their forecast and the market don't like it
is anybody getting a "long running script " message
Negotiations is stronger than in discussion
after 7 years and several decisions I no longer believe in our management or the quality of our technology
I'm afraid to buy or sell because I don't know what is causing the stock to drop on higher than usual volume after what appears to be good news releases
we wouldn't have all this speculation if they would give clear cut information. I see no advantage to their being evasive.
we wouldn't have all this speculation if they would give clear cut information. I see no advantage to their being evasive.
I was the president of a division that was put up for sale with a notice in the Wall Street Journal. It is hard on employee morale but my input to them was that if some one bought us they would want us more than our present company and they should at least see it it through. After 6 months they announaced that we were no longer for sale. That's when the real problems began. I seriously hope and believe a sale or merger is the best thing for all concerned. In our case we produced a product and customers were concerned about our future and caused us to loss sales.
When I had exchange students in my Physics class I had to adjust to their use of periods and commas that was opposite of ours.
I have no doubt you would complain about a free lunch.
Is it possible that they were given this extention in return for committing to go forward on the other blocks. If not why not give extensions on all three blocks at the same time and be done with it .
If you state your fact over and over does it make them more believable
here is a reality check, it has been said:
A good lawyer knows the law.
A great lawyer knows the judge.
I agree, good post
Merry Christmas to all .
The lack of facts make it hard to know what the future will be for this stock. The idea that it may be months before we get solid facts is probably the main reason the stock price is down. A secondary reason is probably the constant negative coments of this board. imho
In my corporate experience the new guy wanted things cleared up early so any blame for problems in the p & L would be on the previous leader and he could more easily show progress going forward.
much improved in tone
FYI
Fiduciary Duties of Directors in Evaluating Buyout Opportunities" that gives an easily understandable summary of director's responsibilities in the event of a buyout offer. As noted by the highlight, stockholders are only informed AFTER the BOD has an offer they want to accept.
The “business judgment rule” is a judicially created presumption that defers to the decisions of an independent board of directors. To receive the protection of the business judgment rule, the directors’ fiduciary duties require them to act in the best interests of the company; therefore, directors who make business decisions in good faith after informing themselves of all material facts are not likely to risk liability for the acceptance or rejection of a buyout offer. It is important for directors to employ the necessary procedures to demonstrate a full and independent review of the proposal, however, in order to avoid a more stringent judicial review than the business judgment rule.
A sale of the company imposes special obligations on the board. As such, courts often use enhanced scrutiny—a slightly stricter standard than the business judgment rule. When approached with an opportunity to sell the company, the board of directors is charged with the duty of obtaining the best buyout price for the sale of the company that is reasonably available, but this does not necessarily have to be the highest price.
In order to achieve the most reasonable price for the company, the directors are required to implement a procedure to evaluate the offer. The decision as to which evaluation process will produce the best value for the shareholders is within the protection of the business judgment rule, so an independent board has significant discretion in designing the evaluation of the transaction. There is no single blueprint that directors must follow, but corporate case law has established that in order for the directors to ward off potential claims for breach of fiduciary duty and receive the protection of the business judgment rule, they must fulfill their fiduciary duties of care and loyalty to the company. These duties require the board to fully inform themselves of available sale opportunities, carefully review and evaluate competing offers and their related financing commitments, and refrain from passing judgment on offers in which they have a material conflict of interest.
Directors are encouraged to seek, and may rely on, professional advisers, such as lawyers and investment bankers, in exercising their duty of due care. In fact, courts give special deference to boards that make decisions after seeking independent advice on the transaction from such third parties. Confirmation from an independent third party that the buyout offer is fair to the company will substantially reduce the risk of a successful breach of fiduciary duty claim.
Most companies are required to seek a shareholder vote on acquisition transactions; therefore, directors also have a duty of complete candor, which involves the full disclosure of all material terms of the transaction to the shareholders once the directors have found an offer they wish to accept.
In the event that shareholders of a company can show that directors appeared on both sides of a transaction, such as through a management-led buyout, courts typically apply a more stringent standard that requires directors to show that the transaction was intrinsically fair to the company. Under this stringent standard, courts look beyond the procedures that the board followed, and inquire into whether the transaction was fair to the company and its shareholders at the time of the transaction. Transactions are also subjected to the more stringent standard of entire fairness when a court finds a breach of the directors’ duty to be fully informed. However, if the board can show that it acted independent of the potential acquirers or interested management, in good faith and exercised due care in their evaluation, courts will typically revert back to the less-stringent standard of the business judgment rule.
In all decision-making, directors should strive to maintain independence, exercise due care and act in good faith in order to receive the full protection of the business judgment rule. Because of the direct impact and critical importance of a buyout offer to a potential target company’s shareholders, directors should fully inform themselves of available sale opportunities, carefully review and evaluate competing offers and their related financing commitments, and refrain from passing judgment on offers in which they have a material conflict of interest. If conflicts of interest arise, directors must be especially certain to employ adequate procedures to demonstrate that they were nevertheless fully informed and obtained the highest reasonable price.
I wish you all the luck in the world!
It was a great concept that didn't fly. Cost me money.
Give it a rest badog! I don't know what the future holds but you don't either so stop the repetitve negative comments without facts. Please
I'll admit to selling due to growing doubts.
I selfom post but am tired of the constant rant against management. I hnow thing could be done better but we don't have to be told 105 times to understand your point. We in general are smart people so quit treating us like school kids.
thanks
Are you implying that all their annual meeting have been good for stockholders?
He didn't say a couple of weeks, he said a few weeks until results. Minor difference but real.
Why would Wachovia securities recently place a restricted label on ERHE stock?
WHY WOULD SMITHKLINE GIVE THE 14 DAY EXTENSION IF THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE THEIR WAS A REASONABLE PRABABILITY OF PAYMENT OR A BUYIN OR A BUYOUT?
The novel "Eclipse" by Richard North Peterson gives a lot of insight into the geopoitics of oils involvement with Nigeria. I founf it an enjoyable and informative read.
why did they say subject to verse when recieved? Probably just ANOTHER POOR CHOICE OF WORDS.
My broker said that the one negative in the 8K was the statement "subject to the Reciept of the money " Could investers still question Sammys intentions to pay?
Happy New years from southwest MISSOURI
Star Scientific vs R J Reynols is going thru the same court non sense as we are. (STSI)
Would the SEC only act if the omision was by intent an not an oversite?
I was lucky and made a quick trade (in at .19 out at .24).
Give me a call when you ger a chance.
It is not smart to piss inro the wind. It is not rational to not care what the sellimg price of your remaining shares will be. Emotional shou;d not be part of investment decisions
My sister in law has been treated for lung cancer with chemo and radiation. The doctor want her to take more chemo as a preventive action against it returning. She will not put herslf thru another round of chemo with all its side affects. The surgen put titantum markers where the cancer was surgicaly removed. If they detect it early they have the option of treating it with radiation because they know where it would likely reappear. The recaf test indicating a positive could be used to start radiation in thr most likely location. Her doctor and her would relish the oportunity to use this test. Many other cancer patients could sleep better if they could get monthly or quarely cleanresult from a test like this. My vote is the test has merit for many even if it dosen't give type and location. This is my opinion and maybe wrong but is a reason for me to own the stock even if I get zero returns on my investment.
rfe
What about a pool of technically qualified people to decide civil cases with complicated issues. Cases could be heard by a group of three and their decisions would be final with limited appeals.
Ron
This is a what investors want to read!!
Thursday January 17, 6:30 am ET
SAN DIEGO, Jan. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Vical Incorporated (Nasdaq: VICL - News) today announced the receipt of a $2.1 million cash payment from AnGes MG, Inc. for costs associated with the ongoing Allovectin-7® Immunotherapeutic for Metastatic Melanoma (AIMM) Phase 3 trial.
ADVERTISEMENT
AnGes is funding the Phase 3 pivotal trial of Allovectin-7® under a previously announced collaborative agreement through a scheduled series of cash payments and equity investments totaling $22.6 million, for which AnGes received exclusive marketing rights in Japan and other key Asian countries, and also will receive certain royalties for sales in the United States and European countries. Vical is conducting the trial in accordance with a Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) completed with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
The payment was triggered by utilization of previous cash balances, reflecting progress in the trial. The cash payment was received as anticipated in late December, and will be included in Vical's year-end 2007 cash balances, consistent with the company's guidance of a projected 2007 net cash burn of $27 million to $32 million. Revenue related to the cash payment will be deferred and matched to trial expenses as they are incurred.
About Vical
Vical researches and develops biopharmaceutical products based on its patented DNA delivery technologies for the prevention and treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases. Potential applications of the company's DNA delivery technology include DNA vaccines for infectious diseases or cancer, in which the expressed protein is an immunogen; cancer immunotherapeutics, in which the expressed protein is an immune system stimulant; and cardiovascular therapies, in which the expressed protein is an angiogenic growth factor. The company is developing certain infectious disease vaccines and cancer therapeutics internally. In addition, the company collaborates with major pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies that give it access to complementary technologies or greater resources. These strategic partnerships provide the company with mutually beneficial opportunities to expand its product pipeline and address significant unmet medical needs. Additional information on Vical is available at http://www.vical.com.
This press release contains forward-looking statements subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected, including: whether Vical or others will continue development of Allovectin-7®; whether Vical will be able to recruit patients as planned, if at all; whether Vical will receive all of the clinical trial funding from AnGes under the collaborative agreement, which will depend on continued development of Allovectin-7® and certain other conditions; whether Vical will receive any or all of the sales-based milestone payments and royalties for sales in the specified Asian countries, which will depend on the efforts of AnGes in obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing Allovectin-7® in those countries; whether any sales will be generated in the United States or Europe, which will depend on the efforts of Vical and potentially additional partners in obtaining regulatory approvals and commercializing Allovectin-7® in those regions; whether Allovectin-7® or any other product candidates will be shown to be safe and effective; the timing, nature and cost of clinical trials; whether Vical or its collaborative partners will seek or gain approval to market any product candidates; whether Vical or its collaborative partners will succeed in marketing any product candidates; whether defined sales levels will be achieved in any markets; and additional risks set forth in the company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These forward-looking statements represent the company's judgment as of the date of this release. The company disclaims, however, any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements.
Contact: Alan R. Engbring
The problem with this stock are the people with Missouri attitudes (Show me the money). When is it comming , how much is comming, who is comming from. The investors want transparency more than ever and this stock is offering uncertainty.
Ron
it's not Siemens
Could they refuse NOKIA the stay but leave the door open for them to request a stay of the execution of the ruling after it is made?