News Focus
News Focus
icon url

jq1234

03/13/13 12:46 PM

#158241 RE: DonShimoda #158235

What was the reason given they are not doing ANYTHING themselves this year? Their ET trial is still ongoing, isn't it?
icon url

bladerunner1717

03/13/13 5:56 PM

#158271 RE: DonShimoda #158235

GERN transcript of the CC--the part I like the best


Operator

And we have another question for you. And this one is coming through from the line of Robert Lawson [ph] at the Katusha Fund [ph].

Unknown Analyst

A couple of questions, first is a bit of housekeeping. It seems to me that the company has a tradition of conducting the conference calls -- sorry, let me rephrase that. You guys put out your Ks on 1 day after the bell, and you have a conference call typically the following morning prior to the bell, which is a, unusual; and b, in my view, forgive me, kind of dumb, as we are having this conversation 15, 20 minutes into the trading day. Is there some reason for that, that I'm failing to understand? And if -- curious. That's the core question mark, more precisely.
John A. Scarlett - Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

Robert, I don't think that we have any particular strategy or plan, it plays out on an individualized basis each time. Basically, we put out the K when it's ready, and we don't try to time it specifically. So there's no specific intent there.

Unknown Analyst

No, no, no. Sorry, that -- the question has to do with the difference between the K versus the conference call. Why not just have as pretty much every other company that's listed in my view does have the conference call at the same time as the K? Meaning, after it's released, a and b, when the market is not in session.
John A. Scarlett - Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

We understand. We'll take your points and certainly consider them for future calls. Thanks.

Unknown Analyst

Sure. Okay, a couple of other follow-up questions. Chip, I guess I'll direct this question to you, and with the greatest respect and my personal feelings for your side, the facts remain -- since you've arrived at the company, the share price is down in the neighborhood of 40%, whereas the broader indices are up around 40%. The pipeline has been reduced by about 2/3, and the headcount has also been reduced by about 2/3. Meanwhile, you walked away with about $900,000 in cash, including about $300,000 in a cash bonus for 2012. A, I guess the question is, do you feel that's appropriate in light of what I just described? And b, I guess put simply, what are you doing on a daily basis in 2013 to sort of earn your $450 per hour?
John A. Scarlett - Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

A little hard for me to respond to, Robert. I would say that the compensation for this company is set, and myself, for that matter, is set in the context of the industry as a whole within -- with the use of external advisors and consultants who are very knowledgeable in this area. I don't have anything to say about my own compensation, so I'm not going to go anything further on that. The second thing is that we have a very -- we have a set of corporate goals. I get judged on the corporate goals as does everyone else. The goals are related to the incentives that we put in front of people to achieve outcomes that we think are long term, very viable for the company. And we're proceeding in that manner. I think that's very consistent with industry practices and I think very good governance in the industry practices. The third comment would be related to what are we doing and what do I do everyday. I think I could just simply say that the efforts to bring a product to the market are long, and they take a lot of time. There are a lot of twists and turns. We've seen this with many companies. And my activities and the activities of the entire, both the senior staff and all the members of the company are, obviously, directed at doing that in the best manner that we know how with substantial oversight from our board. That's what we do everyday.

Unknown Analyst

Okay. And final question, along those lines, I guess you guys just reported, by my count, the, I think, 70th consecutive money-losing quarter for Geron, which may be some sort of a record for a going concern. Be that as it may, let me just sort of couch the question like this, I guess perhaps it's for you Steve, is it fair to say that the company has no present or does the company presently -- are you engaged in any Geron-sponsored, ongoing clinical trials this calendar year, a? And b, completely separate question, when do you anticipate conducting a Phase III trial? And if I can sort of load the bow here, c, is it fair to say, am I understanding correctly that with the myelofibrosis trial, you are waiting to see how the Mayo Clinic trial plays out, which is not a Geron-sponsored trial, obviously, before you begin, I think, you said there's about a 6- to 9-month lag time before you even begin a phase -- a trial in that regard and in that indication? And will it just be a Phase II trial? So are we looking at about, I think, that trial ends March 2014, then we have about 9 months of lag time and then you guys start a Phase II, 9 months later, am I correct?
John A. Scarlett - Chief Executive Officer, President and Director

Robert, let me try to take that question first. I think, to reiterate what Steve has said earlier in the call and the way that we approach this, first of all, I think that the distinction between Geron-sponsored and non-Geron-sponsored trial is a little bit artificial, not in a technical sense. But I think we believed and continue to believe that using in hematologic malignancies, using ISTs is the most efficient, quickest and the best way to get the kind of basic information on safety, tolerability, efficacy and dosing in order to inform the design of a much larger study. Whether that study will be a Phase II, a Phase II, III, a Phase III, we just really can't say right now. It depends on the magnitude, the response, the -- any questions of tolerability and safety that come up and so forth. But I do think that we're getting the kind of data that one absolutely wants to get in order to make really good decisions when you go into a larger, more sophisticated -- well, maybe not more sophisticated, but a larger trial. And so we believe in this strategy. I think we're going to implement it. The intentions are to implement it in several other hematologic myeloid malignancies. And so I think the information that we get from these is extremely valuable. And Steve's already spoken to that. The -- once we believe that we have enough information in order to actually reliably start the process of design of the next Geron-sponsored study, it normally takes anywhere from 6 to 9 months from the day that you know what you want to do to actually getting that implemented. It involves a lot of discussion with investigators, protocols going through IRBs, all the rest. So that is irrelevant, whether it was an IST or whether it was not an IST that gave you that information. You still have that lag time. So I think that we do not anticipate -- to answer your question very directly, we don't anticipate doing any Geron-sponsored studies this year. But I don't think that, that is really the point. I think the real point is that we're getting important information and data that will inform the best possible design going forward and hopefully into very successful future studies.

Unknown Analyst

Okay. And just a last follow-up then in that regard, was it the company's intention -- naturally, hindsight's 20/20, but was the company's intention all along in the design of the MM and the ET trials not to pursue those further but just to have those inform other Phase II, for example, trials in other hematological cancers?
Stephen M. Kelsey - Chief Medical Officer, Head of R & D and Executive Vice President

Yes. The -- going right back to the conception of those trials, we had a number of hematologic malignancies that we wanted to pursue development of imetelstat. At the time, there were concerns about the evidence to support the biologic rationale and there were concerns about tolerability. And so we did those studies to provide support for the biologic rationale and to provide evidence of tolerability in order to expand the program into the diseases where we thought that we could have a much clearer line of sight to market. As we've explained to you, the data from the myeloma study has supported the hypothesis but has done really not much more than that because it was never really designed to do so. The data from the essential thrombocythemia study actually exceeded our expectations and has forced us to reconsider whether in fact there is a development, half pause [ph], in essential thrombocythemia, which is an exercise that's currently ongoing. But fundamental premise of your question, I think, is correct.

Operator

That completes our Q&A session. I'd like to turn the call over to Dr. Scarlett for closing remarks.
John Scarlett

Thanks, everyone, for your time today, and we look forward to providing further updates as our plans with imetelstat develop. Thanks. Goodbye.

Operator

Thank you. Thank you for your participation in today's conference. That concludes the presentation, and you may now disconnect. Have a good day.


http://seekingalpha.com/article/1270581-geron-management-discusses-q4-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=6&p=qanda&l=last