Kenyon - After all you excellent posts over the years, I'm kind of surprised to find you yammering a bit over this recent secondary. BTH's complaining about eveything that crosses his mind is a different matter with a different agenda that is not worth addressing.
As I have asked before on the msg board, what would have happened if HB had not issued the secondaries over the years that he did? Would your stock have been worth more. The general surprise and complaining about secondaries in Ariad as well as other development stage biotechs defies reason. It's as if no knows or wants to accept how the ball is moved forward. I also expected some kind of 534 partnership after what HB said. However, I realize that HB wasn't able to get the terms he wanted so he did the next best thing and saved any partnerships for a time when the value of 534 is more evident.
The other point about this and other Ariad secondaries is that they essentially buy time and time is translated into increased value of the underlying stock because the drug pipeline is significantly moved forward with each secondary. Nothing is lost with the secondary if the funds are well directed. Indeed, it can be argued that value is actually added with Ariad Everything would have been lost without the secondaries - it's just that simple. Partnerships that are badly timed can loose value to shareholders needlessly.
I am sure that you know that this is all part of the ABC's of biotech investing even though BTH wants to make a Greek tragedy out of it. There have been better financial climates for biotech secondaries than this one or 2008, but realities have to be accepted and dealt with as they come up (I know that you don't need that lecture either).
You can feel free to hammer HB for the way he has handled Rida - but I don't agree. The scenery and options that he has faced have changed significantly over the years - and, he has been working within a difficult financial climate. If HB has a clear failing, it is his public statements. HB often voices options that require a more optimistic scenario to unfold than actually materializes; and then, he has to act in seeming contradiction without making expansive explanations to the investing public that might put his actions in context. In that way, HB is probably more defensive than is helpful to his cause.
