Amigo....you must have missed my last few posts. I have said the same thing in regards to when valuing the company potential they have to start at a lower market share. the "formula" is correct. its what amounts to plunk in are way off. the market potential is not the full 2.4 billion revenue. that being said, if as speculated, the company is to manufacture their own pill to safeguard the technology , their costs will go up significantly. the costs that grill used still was using the same 11 million the company has now. that doesnt not include buying of equipment, the building issue is still outstanding and as you pointed out Regabatin is right around the corner. once they start doing those trials R&D costs will go up significantly. all these need to factored in. so as fast as the money comes in, the money will be going back out. this does not mean this is a dead play or a bad investment. it just means one has to be realistic in expectations so one doesn't get frustrated. When that happens you have massive price swings in the price as people dump or get frustrated because they were expecting 41 in earnings and it turned out to be 10 cents.

Grill...No offense taken. I always have been conservative and if I am wrong and it does better I still win ! LOL that being said your numbers are still off. your starting with the wrong first number of the market size. the actual market size to be considered is not the full 2.3 Billion. thats all doses of Oxy. you need to use only the revenue of the one dose and start from there.

Tek...read my other post to Grill, the answer is basically the same. I'm not sure.

Grill....I guess the part I dont get is as you say, the NDA filing is what people are waiting for to validate the company. why? they have already successfully filed and received two ANDA's. while relatively low on revenue because of competition and other factors like lask of full approval on all dosages, and of course keppra is a low value drug to begin with, its the fact that does validate their technology and their ability to successfully negotiate the FDA. I see no difference then in merely filing an NDA. at that point if that is what the street is waiting for to validate the company then we probably wont see any real movement until after an approval. again, based on what Angelo provided, at this point they should have a 90% success rate of being approved, and that should be factored in.

Grill...thats my point. IPCI is very close in the process to the two companies you mentioned but not nearly the market cap. its not that IPCI isn't known by the street. It is. the question then becomes what are they seeing that we aren't? as Angelio pointed out the way to value these stocks we should already be up much further than we are. just like the others. The street clearly is picking up on something it doesn't like. I haven't been able to figure out what.

Angelo....while nice numbers clearly it doesnt help the PPS. as you pointed out in your other post on how to value these biotechs we are at the point where the stock should be valued at its highest potential close to the 90% as we are now at the FDA filing level. if thats the case. the "street" has us currently at $1.60 range. if that is 90% if its value assuming the street follows its own advice, then maybe some of the projections on PPS werent too far off?

Wim.....if I am not mistaken the Panel has 30 days after filing but can take as long as 60 days, in which to review and make a recommendation to the FDA. this is an independent panel that makes that recommendation. the FDA then can either accept or reject that Recommendation and that comes in that rough 6 month time frame after filing. That is why you really dont know for about 6 to maybe 8 months after filing if the FDA will approve. even with a bad or split Panel recommendation, the FDA could still just grant a tentative approval with a target date.

Tek...you are correct. The company has seen the problem with the ANDA pipeline. Besides the FDA, Generics are just too competitive and then IPCI has to share on the profits. making any income minimal at best. the real value is indeed with Rexista. My guess is they have a couple companies lined up to ink deals but they are waiting. the upfront payment goes up the further down the road you get. get the drug filed get one sum. get a favorable panel recommendation that doesn't include a phase 3 , the upfront payment goes up again. get a tentative approval and your maxed out.

my guess, they ink a deal sometime between the panel recommendation and tentative approval or right after the tentative approval. this would put us in the Oct/Nov. time frame and would be about the time they need to raise cash again. I doubt the Odidi's would like to dilute their own holdings further to pay bills when they could make a deal at that point.

True.....thats highly possible assuming the operating costs are a constant. like R&D flucuate based on actual work or tests being done. not something you spread out equally. but assuming your calculations are correct then that still leaves the question of the outstanding loan to Odidi's which was to be repaid by July. based on yourassumptions that would still leave that as outstanding.

well....2nd QE results came in as I expected. continued reduction in revenue due to more competition and therefore softening of prices. my only question that I have remaining is the cash balance. they just finished the public offering which netted them 5.3 million. they received the waiver for the filing of 1.2 million but yet they only have cash remaining of 3.4 million. where did the extra 2 million go? I would hope and read previously where they needed to or wanted to pay off the Odidi loan but one would think they would have mentioned that if that occurred as its a financial material aspect.

Thanks Muddy.....I try. I do like the stock. I believe in its technology and its potential. however, I try to be open mided enough to see the "other side" and to hopefully get a realistic picture of potential and pitfalls. I have owned this stock since 2012. I have traded pharmas and micro caps and small caps in the bio sector for close to 40 years now. but I will admit I don't know it all ! LOL which is why I love honest and open discussion and get others opinions.

Fab....I know that is what you were referring too. I was trying to point out that those agreements that were referred too are no longer in place. just like Teva deal. IF there was any type of deal that would partner any of the ANDA's the company would be required to disclose it. according to their latest SEC filing, the only drug which has any other involvement with another is Focalin.

Fab....I know that is what you were referring too. I was trying to point out that those agreements that were referred too are no longer in place. just like Teva deal. IF there was any type of deal that would partner any of the ANDA's the company would be required to disclose it. according to their latest SEC filing, the only drug which has any other involvement with another is Focalin.

Fab....IPCI does not have any other partners. the other ANDA's still need to find find partnership. just check out the companies own SEC filings the only one that has any other intrest is PAR for Focalin. if the company had a valid agreement for any of the other ANDA's they would have to disclose it on the filing.

Grill.....I like the way you think. as you pointed out unfortunate but we wont know the actual numbers to use so its all guessing. whether its the split or profit margin. but I agree that formula is one best way to figure value, also another consideration is market penetration does not occur overnight.

Angelo....I would agree with most everything you stated with the exception of the following : "Rolling out a drug is very expensive and usually an agreed amount... say $30 million first year - 15 million 2nd year is set aside before royalties are paid... but long term profit margins on drugs - especially pills like Rexista are very high - my guess 65% to 80% profit margin - but, the royalty payments will be on sales or revenues, NOT profits. "

Rolling out a drug is indeed very expensive, that part I agree with. the part you claim "profit margins for pills like Rexista are very high" I do not agree with unless you specify what you what you mean by long term. it usually takes quite a few years of marketing (5 to 10) to before profit margins improve. I also disagree that royalty payments would be based on sales not profits. Milestone payments are indeed based on sales and hitting sales records but royalty payments are most times most times based off the Profits. now that statement is quantified by the following. They can ink a deal based on either. they just adjust the percentage. the precentage they would recieve would say be 50% if based on profits. however if they do base on sales they would be more closer to 20% as a top figure. also if IPCI is to do manufacturing, it would make more sense to royalty off Profit rather than sales. ensuring IPCI would do its part in maintaining cost of manufacture. why would any partner allow IPCI to manufacture without any regard given to their cost and then still pay out a royalty payment based on sales? inking a deal based on splitting on profits ensures both partners do their best to control costs.

of course we will never find out who is right as most times the terms of agreements are never disclosed. one doesnt find out until earnings are released and thats when price shares tank and people get surprised with lower than expected results and its not do to bad sales but people over estimating the anticipated agreement and what it truly means. hence why it becomes important for company guidance in regards to earnings.

Doog....your way off here......you need to start way lower. Rexista may easily achieve 250 million in sales but I doubt they would get a piece of that pie. they would get maybe 50% of the profit. not the sales. of 250 million in sales, the partner would see maybe 25 to 30 million in proift of which IPCI would maybe get half of that or 15 million. better start there

cndrx.....I used that figured based on normal projections from other pharmas on new drugs. while they could see 400 million in sales that doesnt represent profit. there are costs involved in with Sales, marketing, distribution, discounts, inventory, manufacturing costs. you may sell a drug for 10 dollars a pill but it costs 8 to get to the customer. with sales forces, advertising, etc etc. that profit then needs to be split with the partner at a percentage we wont ever know. as example SUPN has a lead drug Troekndi out for 2 years. It goes head to head against Tropomax which has 2 billion in sales. after 2 years they have achieved 141 million in sales and 14 million in profit. and they have a relatively small sales force of 200 people.

well then you have it.....I would say way down the road that is possible. just because of the technology, once its proven, the value of PODRAS would or should give a 2 billion price tag for any buyout. Im not as young as you. I'm already retired and just waiting on my wife. so my end game is just a couple years away. so realistically I am looking at potentials near term. based on the fact the companies business model is sharing profits, I think the companies best prospects are with the partnership and upfront monies, the revenue sharing on Rexista I dont expect to be much more than say 20 million in a couple years. I can see 400 million in sales in a couple years but only 40 to 50 million of that being profit which is then split probably 50/50. so I don't see your $30 price tag anytime soon. but hey, I would love to be wrong.

this coming from someone who believes in the company....good luck in reaching that $30 mark. I'll be happy with much much less. I'll be long gone. but, anything is possible. The Odidi's are getting older. eventually they may sell. a buyout may generate 2 billion because of PODRAS. I havent done the math, would that get you to $30?

that comment I can agree on. this whole thing hinges on them being able to ink the deal. while they may have a lot of interest, will Odidi know what a reasonable offer is? this is the one caveat of double edged sword. where the CEO is also the inventor and therefore is "protective" of their baby.

and I guess there will always be an excuse. the price will pop on submission and then be driven back down to 2.50 level based on your logic because then people will be Leary of an actual approval or that the FDA wont kick it back requesting a phase 3. thats the problem,no real good speculative buying going on.

Really.....the fact they had to do another test to submit I think is good enough reason to push back a couple weeks. but hey, what do I know. clearly the street didn't like the news either. no real pop on news

Doog....lets hope this puts the debate aside. I said I expected the filing to be late July mid August. they are now saying August. lets hope the good news outweighs the pushed back filing and we see a pop not a drop in price.

Thanks for the welcome.

the July 15th deadline comes from the last QE report which was stated they expect to file within 3 months. that is where everyone was thinking they will be filing by July 15. Hence the comments like from Tekra who want to hold their feet to fire saying its a trust thing. Im saying that same comment was reaffirmed the next month in a PR which now would quietly put it back. to mid August. originally last year, they were saying they expect to file 1H16. well its already getting back their first half. my belief is there are many good reasons they can be late filing. in my opinion its no big deal if filed June, July, or August. but I believe there will be those who will take the opportunity to drive the price down when the filing doesn't happen. citing you cant trust them or fabricating there are problems. Happy 4th to all !

One good reason they may not meet the July deadline....
I have read where people keep thinking the filing will be by Juluy 15. it very well may. but dont rely on it and its not a death nail but watch the game players sell the stock down to $1 ...I've read "give me one good reason why ghey would not meet the deadline" here it is right out of their own annual report. "There can be no assurances that we will not be required to conduct further studies for Rexista™ Oxycodone XR, that we will be successful in filing an NDA for Rexista™ Oxycodone XR in six months’ time, that the Fast Track designation for Rexista
TMOxycodone XR will translate to a faster development
and review process with the FDA"

cndrx...I agree the "3 month" time frame was reaffirmed May 12. all these are very calculated. had they not wanted the chance to move it back a month they would have said in 2 months we expect to file.