Was wondering why there was no press release on this - spoke to the BPAX media guy for follow-up. He informed me that the technology actually belongs to Ceregene. Ceregene was a spin-off of CEGE a few years back - but as of end of year last, they only held 16%.
I think that accounts for the muted reaction and also explains why there is no press. This isn't actually CEGE technology - it's Ceregene technology. Looks like Biosante CEO screwed up on this one - Cell Genesys, Ceregene - sound sort of similar....
Pretty annoyed, but, as suspected, this is separate from GVAX, which CEGE still does own and control.
Agree, agree! But I lean towards believing we do not know the whole story as opposed to missing the PR boat. I mean the CEO was interviewed so he knew this was coming out. My question is does a 16% ownership in Ceregene give the CEO of BioSante the right to imply in an article that they own the technology?? I just don't get it and i write alot of my lack of understanding off to my ignorance. And I still do not understand the lack of a market reaction to this since there is nothing our there that says Ceregene is the owner of the technology. the article clearly implies BioSante is the owner and so why/when will the market react? next week could be real interesting. holding BPAX at a 1.73 average so $3 would be sweet!
I should mention this Genetherapy is million times more valuable asset than anything BPAX got. Even BPAX Libigel is a luxury you do not need to use it.
what Genetherapy can do is unlimited "Cure for difficult disease".I think BPAX has to put all its resources to get back ceregene and bring its products to market.
That is why we CEGE shareholders did not wanted to join BPAX and ignor these valuable assets to go after something useless!
The choices you make in life determine your faith!
You're right that gene therapy could be worth more in the long run that Libigel...but the problem is the cost to bring any gene therapy product to market. Look at GVAX right now..it works in certain patient populations, but the cost of resurrecting the program is astronomical relative to the resourrces of BPAX.
My feeling is that they let the clinical info roll in from JH and others, and assuming it is positive, sell off GVAX and the Ceregene stake for a big premium...or maybe the entire thing (GVAX, etc, and Libigel) are packaged together for a big pharma buyout.
Either way at this point, any positive news concerning GVAX or CERE will more the stock, as we saw last week.
As mentioned before, I called Biosante and spoke to Alan Zachary - media relations. His name and number are on their website if you don't believe me (and he apparently answers the phone).
In any event, he confirmed to me that the technology in the Science article was Ceregene technology, of which BPAX holds a minority interest throught the CEGE merger.
Looking at the quote again - it may be true that the genesis of that technology occurred at CEGE, prior to the spin-off. That said, based on Zachary's comment - it is now held by Ceregene. I specifically asked if BPAX would be doing a press release and he said they would NOT be issuing one.
Best case scenario here is that BPAX is working on a merger with Ceregene to bring the technology back into the fold. Second best would be for Ceregene to run with it, go public and make BPAX's investment more liquid - option to hold and grow or sell to raise cash. There may be discussions at different levels that aren't transparent immediately, but on the surface, this looks like a bit of a mess up in communication by Simes.
Anyway - do your due diligence - I had to do some digging, as I was considering transferring around funds to do a major buy. Not so compelling anymore.
I remember just few months ago CEGE was say their subsidery Ceregene when announced this news, also look at the bottom of the news release as who owns Ceregene?
i have the same question. Something does not seem to add up here. The reporter in the story determined that the form of virus used was made by Cell Genesys, which was purchased by BioSante. The reporter then speaks to CEO of said BioSante who states they are negotiating with scientific groups that may license the technology. Now we get media relations stating Ceregene owns the technology. So how can BioSante negotiate, even if they do own a small part of Ceregene?? Would the CEO of a public company mis-communicate something so important?? To me, that would not be a mis-communication, but a mis-representation. Is there something missing here?? I think an e-mail to the Bloomberg reporter is in order.
Well, that makes more sense. It isn't the first time the Ceregene/CEGE confusion has happened. I could not remember hearing about CEGE working on an HIV delivery method for anything.
The good news is that BPAX would now own 16% of Ceregene post merger.
Good luck to all!