InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 253125
Next 10
Followers 839
Posts 120436
Boards Moderated 18
Alias Born 09/05/2002

Re: poorgradstudent post# 109742

Thursday, 12/02/2010 12:20:03 PM

Thursday, December 02, 2010 12:20:03 PM

Post# of 253125
MNTA’s lawsuit has a business rather than a regulatory impetus, IMO. I would be willing to bet MNTA knows that Teva’s Lovenox knockoff is not going to pass muster with the FDA. However, the uncertainty surrounding Teva’s assertions vis-à-vis Lovenox—and the parroting of these assertions by some sell-side analysts—has undermined the conduct of MNTA’s business and, in particular, has made it harder for MNTA to ink partnership deals for FoB’s, M118, and M402.

To get full value for its proprietary technology, MNTA must convince prospective partners that the technology is both valuable and unique, whch is hard to accomplish while Teva is publicly spouting BS about its own Lovenox application.

“The efficient-market hypothesis may be
the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated
in any area of human knowledge!”

Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.