Replies to post #110508 on Biotech Values

[ThomasS]

MNTA: "...could they be setting up for business as usual a la pre-2010?"
Impossible. Folks seem to have lost sight of the fact that MNTA still gets a substantial amount of revenue from M-Enox going forward even if Teva ever gets approval. (A large if). Certainly not the huge wad of current cash, but a substantial annual amount (let's call it $50M) nonetheless under the royalty arrangement. However, Teva has to get that approval and win the infringement case.
All the while awaiting the next game-changer... Copaxone, M118, FoB partnerships, etc.

[HattieTheWitch]

...it seems (IMO) like they are almost operating as if mEnox never happened or was a smaller part of the equation going forward...

That's an excellent observation IMHO. Thank you for it, and the historical detail you provided.

Essentially, what you are saying is that they are operating conservatively, which is what Wheeler said was their intention. Given the description of their past actions, I feel much better about their decision to do the offering. No lavish spending, no, "we're going to undertake this and this and this" talk. I can respect that.

I still don't have my arms around the whole lawsuit matter, and the motivation(s) for it, but financially I'm pleased.

Sorry for not ripping you to shreds, btw. ;-)

[MadCityCyclone]

At least the discount on the offering was 5.5% this time. The last offering in Sept. 2009 was discounted at 7%.


Discount relative to what?

We should, AT LEAST, consider where the stock price was during periods prior to the offerings before taking small comfort in the 5.5% vs 7% numbers that you site.

How about discounts relative to the respective 52-week highs, e.g.?

A lot has changed for this company since 09/09 but this does seem like an unsophisticated financial move by management, an offering by rote.