Replies to post #164109 on Biotech Values

[JohnWayne]

For example, what competent analyst(one who's generally familiar with the cml field) could concur for a second with the idea that Bosulif could become a preferred front-line therapy in cml? Assuming they know enough to realize how unlikely that is, you would expect more than an endorsement of such an idea(despite the minor qualification), when they should be more seriously questioning their survey methodology.

Can you quote the part of the report where CS says that Bosulif could become a preferred front-line therapy?

And also, it's important to understand that just because an ambiguity hasn't been interpreted in the most optimistic/bullish way possible, doesn't mean it's a skewed interpretation.

FWIW I am long ARIA and I don't really take issue with the CS report. I don't agree with it all, but it doesn't come across as misleading to me.

[biomaven0]

For example, what competent analyst(one who's generally familiar with the cml field) could concur for a second with the idea that Bosulif could become a preferred front-line therapy in cml?

From the report:

EU Observations—Results Are Confounding
These results were somewhat confounded by two anomalies: (1) 21 of the 25 physicians
polled answered this question, and (2) four doctors from Italy reported a future preference
for Bosulif in the first line setting, which may represent an error in our survey.

So the analyst well understood the issue here - I cited it as an example of their surveyed docs not necessarily being up to speed and acknowledged that the analyst pointed to this as a possible anomaly. Here's what I said:

(Bosulif as future preferred front-line therapy? - but they do concede this might be some sort of glitch).

This is not an unfair report and is not biased to favor Novartis in some way. I'd characterize it as a detailed and solid, middle-of-the-road analyst report that is also a good example of why I pay little attention to most analyst reports. I'm happy that this sort of report exists and is widely used - it's basically why smart investors can often do well in biotech investing.

Peter