Replies to post #139638 on Biotech Values

[BTH]

I think it is a really stupid analysis, honestly.

[bladerunner1717]

Turtle,

I agree. Vetting by BP is not the only vetting form possible.

However, in oncology, AF's point is stronger. (But even here, there may be some exceptions. I mean what was SPPI's market cap when Fusilev was approved?) If, for instance, CLDX shows positive data in breast cancer for 011, but can't find a partner, then I'd be wary of holding onto my position, if CLDX decided to take 011 into Phase III by itself.

In short, it's another "rule" for biotech investors to consider. All in all, I think AF is making a much bigger deal out of this than it really is.


Bladerunner

[jq1234]

I think he's being too simplistic by only looking at the marketcap. CORT was slightly less that 300M a few months before it announced +ve P3 results. TSRX is < 200M after a successful P3 and was < 300M before the results were announced. The marketcap depends on the potential market of the drug so his theory doesn't apply to companies like CORT and other companies which the market assumes don't have a potential blockbuster. I think the percentage held by institutions and short interest are much better indicators of companies that have been vetted by the market.

AF wasn't talking about any phase 3 trial, he was talking about oncology phase 3:

based on a theory we developed which directly correlates the market value of a company developing cancer drugs with the outcome of phase III studies.