InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 389
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/12/2009

Re: exwannabe post# 99291

Monday, 10/15/2012 4:44:25 PM

Monday, October 15, 2012 4:44:25 PM

Post# of 345969
Thank you ex for your take on this. I'm concerned that we appear to be supporting competition to one of our chosen avenues to access a major market for our products. I guess one can look at it as creating a greater potential to gain access to those imaging markets but at the price of having to share the wealth (i.e., we make less and the pipeline is worth less). I would have preferred that the PPHM patent portfolio would have locked up tight the use of our intellectual property mabs with any type of radionuclide for use in imaging. It may be that way but it doesn't look like it if there are other companies doing research with our mab and their choice of radionuclide and no announcement of any deals regarding this use.

However, I prefer to now look at it (after receiving FTM's info on the crediting of Thorpe and Peregrine)as a deal in the works between Genentech and Peregrine and that Genentech is performing some research on the scope of the imaging potential and to get a head start on locking up different avenues of the imaging property rights.

Only time will tell.
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent CDMO News