.........HUGE potential if things pan out for this company...of course anything may happen..but so far some pretty effective results from the trials (shown on slides of actual people before and after therapy....very impressive)............this is the type of stock you may look back on 5 years from now and say..........what a steal at current prices and a stock that COULD make many here millionairs down the road........just maybe
I'd rather that they raise money when the share price was between 3 and 4 dollars.
And I'd rather that they not give away more stock further diluting "our" share price.
And I rather that they not reward themselves for doing what I consider "fluffing". Gee look what we did. We screwed the investor again and they can't do anything about it.
And sadly, most of the investor's seem to eat that crap up.
You say, "I guess I am just not as pessimistic as many, nor do I see sinister motives in all of this". I say that I'm more pragatic than most. I've seen this same type of bad management over and over and over.
So shame on me for not being a better trader.
Take a look at the history, and I mean long term history (you're a newbie, so I'm talking 10-15 years) of Curis and you should see the same pattern of poor decisions and execution. And please don't bring up the $20 price that Curis attained during the tech bubble. That has to be thrown out.
I've not seen anything done for the investor other than partnering with companies that know what their doing. Show me an actionable event caused by Curis management, on their own (remember, the DNA's, and Debio's come to them and make the deal, not the other way around)that improved shareholder value. I'd be very interested.
I guess I am just not as pessimistic as many, nor do I see sinister motives in all of this. When things were looking really sketchy about 18 months ago, the top admin took a substantial cut in their pay in trade for future stock. Right or wrong they likely look at this bonus as a reward for prior actions. I really think that a lot of this depends upon ones perspective...I am willing to wait a few more years (started buying 3 years ago). If one is hoping for a quick return this would be very disappointing. I would suggest that for the individual investor, the stock market will bite you if quick returns are your goal. The big boys have super computers, math/probability experts that will always win before us in the short return/quick trading arena. In my opinion, we have to find established value and stick with it or find an early company with a good idea and then stick with it through the ups and downs. Look at the long term chart of Gilead. About a decade of low prices along with a few missteps and now one of the highest values/employee on the planet. I will be the first to state that this approach can be a bit tedious and trying at times.
P.S. Welcome back Glen. How is the cognitive therapy going for the personality disorder?
Say what you will, but I believe this was a poorly thought out and executed deal. Typical of small companies with staff that don't know what they're doing.
Regarding Passeri and my reference to him being a doctor, I'll say I was wrong, but I haven't researched him in a number of years. I guess my memory is faulty.
I'm further disillusioned that the management rewards themselves before they reward the hand that feeds them. Hence my disillusionment and disgust in the staffs behavior and motives.
golf001er, I agree with your assessment. For those longs who are complaining about the current stock price, we are up from under a buck not too long ago. Sure we are down substantially from what proved to be a temporary pop over $3.70 but when you look at the trend going into last summer it wasn't looking good to be over $2 right now.
At this point as Passeri stated, we have the funds to carry us through 2012 and that is without any milestones from Roche. While the royalties from the sale of the drug in 2011/12 will be minimal, I would venture to guess that we will be getting substantial milestone payments when they file for the NDA and then when it gets approved. That cash along with the milestone payments from the initiation of phase 3 for colorectal cancer and ovarian cancer will then carry us well into 2013 or 2014 when the royalties will be able to support us.
The capital raise at this point was a prudent thing for management to do IMO. Look back at the financial markets a year ago and remember they can dry up again like they did last year. If that were to happen when we REALLY need the money, the company and its shareholders would then be royally screwed. Asking for money from anyone when it looks like you really need it gives you no leverage. Having an additional cash cushion in the bank that will carry us through any unforeseen delays in getting drugs approved is very prudent.
This drop is temporary if the drugs work. For those willing to wait and speculate, this could be one of those rare 10-20 baggers and more IMO. If the drugs don't work and don't get approved then no matter what management did or didn't do will help us a year from now.
Good luck all, and remember to buckle your safety belt for what is and will prove to be a wild ride for Curis this year.
Just an update on a few misstatements. Passeri is not a Doctor. He has a Masters in Biotech and a J.D. degree. The MD/Phd on the management team was bumped up to V.P. about a year ago after he thought of multi-node CUDC-101. He is likely the tie to the Chinese chemistry connection. This is all readily available. Please do your research before making statements as if they are factual.
Personally, I think the move to raise cash while the iron was hot was brillant for those of us who are willing to wait a few years. This allows for a much stronger future position if there are future buy out offers. The recent rise above 3 was very shaky in my opinion. It seemed to be based on speculation of a buy out and nothing truely fundemental. I am happy in the 2's for a while yet based on the current science and hope to buy more on the dips. This being said, If I had bought in the 3's I'd be pissed, but I would not blame the administration.
What we often see is not reality, but a product of our imagination. Such is the nature of humanity.
i disagree! when the company has no drugs on the market !! deals like this can make
investors like me, who was long the stock, think management is just fleecing
the common shareholders !
What's your interpretation of today's pretty high volume, unfortunately to the downside, in light of the offering.
I would have thought that we should be much closer to the $2.52 price, never mind going down on big volume. When does down on big volume spell out good things?
I'm also not enamored with Passeri. He's never (and I've been here far longer than I should have, but on the other hand, been here long enough to think the Pres. and his staff are getting rich off us) done much that's impressed me. His timing seems to have been wrong, his motives (read greed) seem to be pervasive, and his business saviness seem to be missing. I guess it could all be dismissed by saying he's a doctor. But when you become CEO, you have to have very high standards IMO.
At any rate he'll get basically the same message in an email. I doubt he'll reply (see all of the above reasons), but I'll try.
Thanks if you respond,