My predicition. Of course Affymax will not host a conference call. IMO it is not a matter of "chickening out" but what is there left to say? Affymax executives are not likely to apologize for the dead patients and failed rollout or to sympathize with the prescribing nephrologists who killed or hurt their patients they were sworn to help. How can Affymax cheer its terminated employees or encourage its Takeda partner? What words of hope can Affymax relay to assuage the losses of its gutted shareholders and not face liability for misrepresentation? It is not like Affymax executives have the same free reign as the pumpers on this board such as doyoulikeneruda and others.
I have to admit that I would not be holding onto a short position still just because anything crazy could happen. Even if/when AFFY goes BK there is some chance (I guess) that AFFY is bought out by Takeda for $1/share -- or maybe (?) based on the company's losses, then some other company will be able to do accounting tricks so that AFFY is worth over $1 to them. I don't know.
Anyway, that being said, there is a very real possibility that we are thinking about this CC and the future of AFFY way more than the management. There is word being passed around that this entire place will LITERALLY close its doors in three weeks. There is very good chance that the only concern of AFFY execs is to get large golden parachute and that is ALL they have on their minds. This is the word on the street.
That being said, I still don't see the logic of retaining a short position from $16, unless there are tax benefits. I have never shorted - not because I am against it but the upside just scares me. TG.
They will need time to analyze and formulate a strategy based on the results, before it would be prudent to host another conference call. The conference call announcing the re-call pretty much stated this- in working with the FDA & Takeda they decided it was the right choice to pull the product off the market to determine where they issues are. They will need to review and analyze the stats from those that suffered fatal effects to see if there is any kind of common thread between them- did each have a certain ailment, condition, other medications that might have caused issues, etc. They did not feel that the issues were tied to a particular lot, but will also have to review manufacturing practices- did something change with the methodology or perhaps base material from their supply chain channel was altered. They did state that Takeda, per their agreement, shares in the profits as well as the expenses- so they will also be sharing in the re-call costs.
Very early to determine where this might be headed, but the management team seems to be taking the sensible path by putting patients safety as priority #1 over profits, image, and ego. IF they can get to the root cause of the issue, I believe taking this path will get them back to market quickly.
@ stoutsval- I don't agree with you logic here. They need to determine the root cause, not saying they have to solve it. When you have no idea what is causing the problem, you don't know what you are "warning" against. If there is a certain condition that causes fatality- they can issue a warning, but without knowing what it is you have no basis to do so.
In your Boeing example, the root cause was the overheating battery- while they might not have fixed the exact problem they could put things in place to prevent it from occurring. If you don't know what the root cause is- all you can say is fly at your own risk as plane can crash. With Affy- without knowing the root cause all you can say is- if you take this you may die- something the FDA nor patients would be too keen on. However, if for example, you can say- if you are on medication X, or if you have extreme hypertension, do not take this drug- than you are back in business.
Even if they cannot get to the "root cause" of the issue, they can still add a warning, probably black boxed, about possible anaphylaxis to the label and get back on the market.
Look at how Boeing is advancing the Dreamliner toward re-introduction without knowing the "root cause" of the battery problem. They are putting in systems that ensure a plane will not be at risk even if its battery overheats.
Root cause analysis is not the answer to everything, harm reduction also has its place.