gfp (OT--re: IMGN),
I can tell you that Dr. Ron Garren considers the trials in metastatic breast cancer that DNA is running to be about as close to a "slam-dunk" (my term, not his. I borrowed it from some guy on the COR board--LOL) in oncology as you're ever going to get. As you know, I 'm not an authority on these things, but I assume DNA will go for a third-line approval, and then try to move it up to 2nd and/or first-line. Since all patients, according to Garren, ultimately become refractory to Herceptin, this figures to be a really huge drug. The problem is that IMGN probably gets only around a 5% royalty rate. Nonetheless, they have other good partnerships with major BP's (and another one, I believe, with DNA), so a validation of their linker technology should really boost them, assuming approval.
PGS (poorgradstudent) on Dew's Ihub board is realy anti-IMGN. He is a very, very bright guy, so you should check out his critique. Personally, I don't think his arguments hold much water. He intensely dislikes the ex-CEO, Mitch Sayare, but Sayare is gone now. PGS also says the royalty rate is only about 5%. I say so what. On a $2 billion drug that's still a $100 million/year or close to $2/share. Even at $1 billion/year, it's a dollar a share in revenue for a $200 million market cap company.
PGS' other argument, as I recall, has to do with the fact that DNA tinkered around with IMGN's linker technology. Again, I say so what. Does anyone really expect DNA to go back to IMGN and say that:
"It's not really your technology anymore?"
PGS further argues that TDM1 won't be on the market for another 6-8 years. I know of no analyst who follows IMGN who believes that that timeframe is anywhere near correct.
I don't own the stock, but I'm following it. MY concern is how this whole Roche hostile bid thing is going to affect DNA.
McBio on Dew's board has some interesting things to say about IMGN.
Bladerunner
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
