CHM,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me. They do provide some insight, but not all of it. I do agree that these figures were probably made well before 2006, actualy when INSMED was apparently talking to Paul Capital for additional funding (At least that is what I learned from the various documents).
I do not completely agree to your views, because I think INSMED must have been able to roughly calculate a launch date, based on expected approval date and what work needed to be done afterwards. So I believe that they have taken this into account when making the original projections. If you calculate that we will have roughly 33 patient*year revs for 2006, whereas INSMED originally projected 200 patient*year revs, the difference is not explained by the fact that INSMED might have calculated with a slightly different launchdate (although I doubt it whether they realy thought that they were going to launch on or before 1 jan 2006)
And you'are right they are just projections and a lot is still to come and can changes in future years. By the way have you taken a look at Lazards projected penetration percentages for Iplex by year end 2006? All I am saying is that they might have been a little overoptimistic and let's hopen that doesn't back fire.
Finally I don't believe you hire a large expensive sales force and put them on the backburner until after the trial is over.
As for me personally, I have been in and out INSMED the last years and find it a fascinating company with great potential and great risks (for investors). I currently have a small stake, but I think I will temporary get out before the trial verdict and will look for a nice entry moment again later on.
Thanks again for taking my observation (a little) serious, unlike some others :-)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
