InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 32
Posts 2552
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/16/2006

Re: gfp927z post# 33606

Friday, 05/21/2010 2:43:50 PM

Friday, May 21, 2010 2:43:50 PM

Post# of 47763
Getting back to Cortex: I am not spending much time agonizing over what Cortex will do if they have strong SA results. It would be nice to have that problem. The way it would sort out would be: They'd listen to offers for CX-1739. They would quantify what the cost would be to them of not developing and partnering CX-1739 for ADHD, but instead using a backup. Any partnering discussions regarding SA would include--If you want CX-1739, you have to make it worth our while to delay ADHD. They aren't going to divide the molecule by indications. Sometimes companies will divide a molecule by territory, generally licensing out Japan/Asia rights, partly because those markets require local trials, so they arent going to be relying on results from US trials by another licensee.

A more likely alternative would be: Selling an option to license CX-1739. The option would be contingent upon ADHD results. If positive, and in return for an upfront 'retainer', the potential licensee will have the option to partner CX-1739 for both indications for $XX million. There could even be an additional clause for the possible inclusion of sz/dep rights. Look at the AstraZeneca/Targacept agreements around 5619 as an example of deal flexibility.

It would be a nice problem to have.

NeuroInvestment
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent RSPI News