% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

  • snogreen snogreen Mar 7, 2004 9:50 PM Flag

    Another SGP/SCLN lie

    I had to re-read all your points again. Maybe for a third time, umjd67. Here is another whopper: Point number #10:

    <<10) There are six milestone payments for Hep B and five for Hep C. Milestones and amounts are xx'd.>>

    Get that???? There are supposedly milestone payments from SGP to SCLN. SIX for HBV!

    Now, has SCLN EVER declared a milestone payment from SGP. Answer: NO! Has SGP ever started (or given a milestone payment) for Hep C Japn trials? Answer: NO!

    Don Sellers was SPECIFICALLY asked to spell out EXACTLY what milestone payments were coming to SCLN in the last conference call. He said there were only milestone payments from Sigma Tau. THERE WERE NO MILESTONE PAYMENTS FROM SCHERING PLOUGH. He said that I believe (or Waldron said it, but it was SPECIFICALLY asked re: SGP and milestones)Yet, how can that be if SGP still has the Japan right? If the contract umjd67 posted is right? Then SGP owed SCLN milestone payments on HBV in Japan.

    Howevre, IF THERE WAS NO INTEREST...OR HBV TRIAL involvement by SGP.. for all intents they gave up in 2000 or 2001 (which is what an SGP SPOKESPERSON TOLD TWO SCLN poster inquiries)..then they pay no milestones. Right?

    1. SCLN stated they had no milestones from SGP
    2. No SEC filing showed any milestone payments by SGP.

    Is it all a LIE? Or is SCLN just not telling us the "whole truth"?

    Answer is clear. SCLN is hiding from us once again. And this one is a REAL "quarter pounder" either.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • >>>To have contractual obligations with SGP ended sounds like a great relationship considering SGP. :-)<<<

      LOL!! Well, maybe! :~) But it's still hugely deceptive at best, and still is material information, if it happened. Tc

    • Didn't SCLN say they have renegotiated the contract with SGP at least twice?

      Are you guys sure that you are looking at the "latest" contract?

      Just wondering....

      • 1 Reply to nolongerwaitingformoabo
      • As I previously indicated, this SGP agreement was first filed as an exhibit to SCLN's 10-K in 1993. It countinued to be referenced as an exhibit until a few years ago, which would indicate either the agreement was terminated or was no longer considered a material agreement. There has been no other agreement with SGP identified as an exhibit in any SEC filings. They are required to file all material contracts. Maybe they have a new agreement with SGP and do not consider it to be material. Stay tuned for the 10-K this month to see whether they clarify Don's answers which seemingly conflict with SEC filings.

13.19+0.15(+1.15%)Jun 29 4:00 PMEDT