R, I thought that Terry or someone had posted the vote tallies
for both the House and Senate. Do you think that there is a real prospect that the DTRA funding could be restored in a budget conference committee?
Jake, a point about the poison pill. You cite the $11+ per share basis as a problem, likely unnecessarily. Keep in mind that the poison pill only becomes at issue if there is a hostile takeover attempt. If management so obliges, they could offer a "friendly" deal for shareholder approval at any price they can negotiate.
That said, I note that the only reason why the poison pill should be a point for aggravation for a long investor is if they have an interest in a party viewed as hostile by PPHM management for doing a buyout or they don't believe that the PPHM technology will ever reasonably command that sort of valuation. Considering the high potential value of Bavi if it delivers good results in phase 2 trials, an $11+/share poison pill basis seems about right sized as a place holder during this period of uncertainty.
If an interested party thinks Bavi is worth less than $11 per share, they can work out something with PPHM management in a friendly way. If PPHM management is not obliging for a low price buyout, the interested party can go to shareholders and attempt the buyout for a basis of only about $3 billion in equity, which is less than the current capitalization of Imclone and its Erbitux. So the cost of doing an end run around PPHM management is not too far out of line for what the market values a mature, competitive product that can treat less indications than Bavi and is projected to be inferior to Bavi in terms of efficacy. If the issue is that the perceived market value of Bavi etc. is somewhere between zero and $11 per share and PPHM management is holding out for too much, the ongoing trials should better support what the real Cotara and Bavi value is soon enough.
Thus, the poison pill is a good thing to have in place by my reckoning, especially after observing the market questionable measures that have been impacting PPHM stock price over the last six months. Hey, if you are championing for some interested party to buy out PPHM at a lower price than the PP would enable, why not profile the candidate for the board? Problem is, if it became known that a pharma had serious buyout interest in PPHM, it is not likely that current low pps would linger very long, LOL.
If hindsight shows that Bavi is the flagship product of a new class of drugs that can effectively treat the litany of indications cited in the PPHM patent portfolio, $11 per share is a cheap price for a big pharma and I would be happy to know that my investment was getting a reasonable return after accumulating for the last seven years. We will all have a better sense about valuation of PPHMs properties when trial results come in and so prove. Will parties with an agenda hostile to those of PPHM long investors be successful in keeping PPHM underfunded for the next year?
Best wishes and IMO.
KT
