Replies to post #259882 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[biopharm]

I maintain until someone proves me otherwise than what is in the PPHM Shareholders Protection Plan, namely that the poison pill protects against direct and indirect attempts of acquisition of PPHM by one or more parties acting together and against the advice of the BoD when it come to those parties to participate in a vote while holding more then a certain % of the shares.

I agree 100% here and soo much can be discovered by simply looking at Medarex and how BMS gobbled them up. I wonder if any guarantees were made that influenced some Medarex BOD... because those that vote for that BMS offer are seemingly placed on many other BOD's and could even be guaranteed jobs in BMS after.

Dan Rohrer
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dan-rohrer-a303b011

Anyhow, lots of ties between Peregrine<>Medarex in those early years and maybe BMS discovered PS Targeting + certain Medarex pipeline drugs work well together

-------------

Terry, great find on the Medarex Anti-PSMA AACR abstract #1171 (4-2-06), which relates to the 8-2005 licensing by Medarex of Peregrine’s Anti-PSMA technology for the treatment of solid tumors. Gotta love the Medarex conclusion:

…Treatment of established LNCaP tumor xenografts with anti-PSMA conjugate at a single dose of 0.3 umol/kg resulted in complete tumor regression with no associated weight loss. Further definition of the therapeutic window has revealed significant therapeutic effects at very well tolerated doses. Human clinical testing for the treatment of drug-resistant prostate cancer is planned.”

= = = = = = = = =
4-4-06 AACR #1171: PPHM/MEDAREX’s Anti-PSMA

AACR/4-2-06 abstract #1171 “Human Antibody Conjugates Of DNA Minor Groove-Binding Alkylating Agents wth Single Dose Efficacy in Xenograft Models Which Retain Activity in Drug Resistant Cells” by Medarex’ David J. King relates to the 8-2005 licensing by Medarex of Peregrine’s Anti-PSMA technology for the treatment of solid tumors. Peregrine received an upfront payment and annual maint. fees, and may receive future payments based on the achievement of clinical milestones and a royalty on net sales if approved by FDA. http://www.medarex.com/Strategy/Partners.htm

For more on the 8-25-05 Peregrine/Medarex Anti-PSMA VTA partnership, see:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=7494998

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=10009281

[thealias2002]

CP,

If it's not under dispute, as you said, then you have to recognize that a hostile takeover, while on the surface could appear to negatively impact shareholders, may actually benefit shareholders. So, it absolutely is in direct response to your comments about the poison pill.

PPHM management has done nothing (I'll repeat that for effect), nothing, to create value for the long shareholders when considering scientific development of it's drug pipeline and PPS. Yes, they have tried and may get an A for effort,....but failure is failure and they get an F for result. By that alone, and possibly in this case alone, having a poison pill in place may actually be hurting long investors.

The only thing we don't know to answer that question is, 'could another company that assumed PPHM through a hostile takeover possibly do any worse?'

I'll leave you with that question to ponder.