Good evening,
Regarding the Celgene spin-off, Celularity, certain posts caught my eye.
FDA, Melon, Saud, Straightshot and zzaatt (in alphabetical order) have made some very valid points in their posts and they speak for themselves. Given the complex scientific area of discussion, as a shareholder, not an industry expert (!), I can only comment in terms of my perception (to the "long-suffering readers" of my posts, therefore, please, take what I say with a "pinch of salt" and preferably read this in a relaxed setting with a glass of wine).
Melon made some interesting comments and also referred to hype. Hype is not a substitute for following due scientific and regulatory process when developing new therapies. Hype does not remove the uncertainty of future progress in the development of any new therapy. An impressive array of backers and a very healthy bank balance may help in terms of public perception and potential advantages n3m3sis referred to (direct quote: "Development can be accelerated a great deal if you have the funds to do it") but they do not, in themselves, provide a company with preferential treatment by the regulator and are not a guarantee for success. If valid, the science will eventually speak for itself.
I very much like FDA's quote, see below, because besides being witty it makes sense to me.
"Pluristem Is The Turtle And Celularity Is The HARE..IRI ! We All Know Who Won That Race ! YOU WILL SEE IN THE FUTURE IMO."
Saud's take on the business angle was very interesting, so I am reposting it, see below.
"their [Pluristem's] margins will be huge, and undercut everyone else on price, big advantage in the BUSINESS world, its all about margins! Zami figured that out a long time ago".
Straightshot to me seemed spot on in his post when he stated: "sure it is competition but more importantly it is validity... dare I say we are several years ahead of this new entity but we do need to get a successful trial under our belt to solidify our leading position... "
I also appreciated zzaatt providing a clear example of the implementation of CAR-T technology in the relevant setting and agree with his observation as quoted below.
"the applicability of the technology to literally millions of patients is simply not possible for CAR-T, at least not now, and maybe never!"
We just don't know yet what will transpire in the future and I agree with zzaatts's view that we may not even be comparing like with like.
I think overall perhaps we should not lose any further sleep [ :) ] over the Celgene spin-off.
HappyBee
PS Hi Allo, thank you for today's posts. I will look at the information in more detail later.
