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

SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

  • sunshinekathy34 sunshinekathy34 Jun 19, 2005 3:53 PM Flag

    a wrod to the wise

    Tere is an old story about the young trader and the old trader.......They bought a stock and it went up a few points and the young trader said he was going to take his profir and asked if the old trader was going to do the same.......The old trader said 'not a chance' why not??? and the old trader said I dont want to lose position......That is great advice...Only the strongest minded trader can pay higher then where he sold to try to 'regain position' In the meantime the old trader is sitting comfortably with a profit and cant be shaken out by the short term swings.....So, for you young short term traders here is my advice....Hold your position.....if you are out and news hits you will not be able to get back in easily, and if you do go back in,.. it will be for fewer shares....Buy what you can afford to hold and ignore the gyrations......Dont be 'left at the post' when the race actually starts.......This horse is either already off or in the starting gate...If there is a dip....consider it a long term opportunity..The market uses your human nature to try to destroy you.....Dont play with this stock...others are not 'playing'...We may be holding the stock of the century...If Sciclone turns out to be a great stock it would be a shame not to own what each of us can afford... If not, well, you pays your money and you takes your chances... Im going to give it a chance.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • "Maybe I am in "conspiracy mode" tonight, but my thought was, is that "big Business" really doesn't want cancer to be cured."

      Big Business absolutely does want a cure for cancer-- and the flu-- and the common cold-- and each member of the "big business" club wants to be the one to find that cure so they can market it.

      More, there is absolutely no incentive for them to not push for a cure for disease "X" because as soon as a solution for one problem appears, there seem to be plenty more to take its place. For example, HIV is a plague of the 20th century. New strains of E Coli pop up in the food supply-- with potentially deadly consequences. Add BSE, SARS, Bird Flu, Antibiotic resistant strains of various pathogens...assorted genetic misfires and injuries wrought by the latest and greatest in technical development-- purposeful (war) and not (accident)..... well, the list is endless, as is the need for continual product development in medical sciences.

      As to whether or not other companies know zadaxin works... I suspect they do. But whether it would work, if at all, with their products to an extent that would make it financially worth while is another matter.

      Perhaps you'd be well served to look at this (perhaps again):

      It's pretty clear from the mode of action that zadaxin can be predicted to support therapies that benefit from enhanced immune function, but not those which do not (any of the autoimmune disorders, and any that are a derangement of immune stem cell differentiation). That is why it is a great candidate to tag with a viral disease (like hepatitis, bird flu, sars,...)therapy.

    • >>>Also I respectfully disagree - I think that they *KNOW* that it works. Companies want to ensure a safe position for themselves whenever a change of scenery occurs, I believe that lots of companies do not know where they will fit in and therefore, are reluctant of acceptance of Zandaxin.<<<

      Then, IMO, we would have been bought out by now. Sno is merely the most vocal member of the "offer me 6 and I'm outta here!" chorus, but there are many voices in it. I could be wrong, but I don't remember any really intriguing cancer data coming out since SciClone reincorporated in Delaware in June '03, so if they know now they likely knew then, and then would have been the time to make a move. They would have had a court fight (poison pill) and would have had to offer ~10, but the gut feeling I have about big pharma is that on the infrequent occasions it thinks of Zadaxin, it yawns and says "immune enhancers don't work." Wind_waker (a frequent poster on the boring IDIX board and an occasional one-liner critic on this one), who claims to be an immunologist (I believe him) totally disparages Zadaxin, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he represents stereotypical immunological thought as a whole. His strongest argument (imo) against Zadaxin was "we don't understand how it works if it works, and what shuts the immune responce off post Zadaxin?" and in a way that's a good thing: I want my doctor to be cautious of treatments he doesn't understand. But as an investor I don't take the same risk a patient does, and to me clinical data/studies clearly show that Zadaxin is an effective ISE. I don't have to know HOW something works to be confident that it does and to invest in that possibility. Tc

    • I would take $45 before trial results are announced but not afterward. I think that any approval in the US will result in very big off label use to treat any disease where increasing T4 cells is believed to be helpful. For instance, if I had AIDS I would be buying Zadaxin from Panama right now. But, I am afraid that we will be bought out before we hit $45.


    • do u think we might get bought for a similar price? i would take 45 for my shares, how about u?
      do u think the Cavazza buying is over or will continue?

    • Maybe I am in "conspiracy mode" tonight, but my thought was, is that "big Business" really doesn't want cancer to be cured.

      I forget the exact statistics, but it is aproximately 90% of medical expenses are used in the last 6 months of life (a lot of it due to cancer).

      If a combo/Zandaxin cocktail could cure cancer in the elderly and then they could just die in peace at home - how could universities/big business possibly fund or justify the research $$$ going into cancer?

      I actually agree with you. Many companies would benefit financially, but there would be a lot more "cure aka research" businesses that would go away.

      Also I espectfully disagree - I think that they *KNOW* that it works. Companies want to ensure a safe position for themselves whenever a change of scenery occurs, I believe that lots of companies do not know where they will fit in and therefore, are reluctant of acceptance of Zandaxin.

      Just a thought.

    • It's not hard to be smarter than the big drug companies. I bought lots of shares of Scios at 4 to 6 dollars per share and sold to JNJ for $45. I also voted against the buyout and felt that I was robbed.

      I don't think that the big drug companies are all that smart.


    • >>>Cancer is *BIG BUSINESS*.
      If it were highly treatable(with Zandaxin), *LOTS* of other companies would suffer reduced revenues.
      Praise be the USA.
      The only place in the world where one can lobby with clout (provided you can donate the $$$$)
      Simplified: I believe that there is *POLITICAL* pressure to ensure the *FAILURE* of Zandaxin.

      I respectfully disagree. If Zadaxin works against cancer, it does so in combo with other drugs, not in mono. Instead of political pressure there would be jockeying for position among the major oncology players--each would want to be part of a clinical trial with its estalished cancer drug + Zadaxin so as to get ahead of the competition. If they believed Zadaxin worked, that is, which, at the moment, they don't. Tc

    • It reminds me of a story regarding Linus Pauling, the vitamin C guy.

      He *PERSONALLY* sponsered a study of using 10000 mg of vitamin C against a particular form of cancer (I forget which type - this was 20+ years ago). In his personal study, (keep in mind that he had no way to profit off of vitamine C), he found that there was a "statistically significant" cure rate when vitamine C was administered. He then went to the American Cancer Society, presentedted his results, wanted them to sponser another study which was much greater than his original scope and they simply said "No. It cannot be that simple." I believe that Zandaxin helps with a whole lot more, but there is political pressure to keep it from reaching the market place.

      Cancer is *BIG BUSINESS*.

      If it were highly treatable(with Zandaxin), *LOTS* of other companies would suffer reduced revenues.

      Praise be the USA.

      The only place in the world where one can lobby with clout (provided you can donate the $$$$)

      Simplified: I believe that there is *POLITICAL* pressure to ensure the *FAILURE* of Zandaxin.


    • Kathy,

      I applaud you. What you have just stated has taken me years to learn. As I have stated before, I am a recovering day trader. With my first few trades as a day trader, a very unfortunate thing happened to me. I was trading LSI (on margin to the max) and I made $15K in one day. I said to myself "Wow, this is just too easy". I them proceded to give it back in drips and drabs for the next six months until I was at my original equity. *THEN*, I thought my time had come. I was also remembering how good I felt when I was 15K ahead. In an act of desperation to feel good again, I went long LSI. (BTW - this was when LSI was under $6.00 - now at ~$8.00). Well I discovered that even though I had $250000 in "buying" power for day trading, to the NYSE that is a trivial amount, and I got pounded into taking a 20% loss. It hs been a long hard road, but I am finally discovering that ultimately, fundamentals rule. The only requirement is patience. This also cuts down on commission costs.

      My bottom line:

      You don't trade to "feel good" or to get a thrill. If you want to do that, take a $100 to a casino and play the quarter slots and get "free" drinks.

      I now trade to make money to buy *TIME* (not things) to hopefully enhance my quality of life by buying time to enable me to do the things I like.

      I am (painfully - because I miss th thrill) changing my attitude from being a speculator to being an invester.

      I am curious about you strategies for exiting.

      This is very frustrating to me. Awhile back, I bought covd.ob from $1.40 all the way down to $.70. It finally peaked at $7.06. At $5, I was recomending it to my friends. I got caught up in euphoria. I finally got out at $2.80 (125% profit). But when it was at $7.00, I had nearly a $200K profit - that is a lot for me.

      Anyway, what would be your exit strategy *WHEN* this stock is trading say between $50-$100 / share? When it has exploded to the max, whould you play the oscillations? Exiting has alway been a problem for me on a profitable trade.

      I would appreciate yout thoughts about it, especially with regard to SCLN.



      • 2 Replies to fooled_me_1x
      • in the absnece of a buy out which eliminates your need to make a decision Granville had theories for exit timeing and there is some logic....He ended with the bell alarm [in oldie days they used to ring a bell on the dow jones when there was important news ......News is a time for selling but in a big move there are at least 3 pieces of news.......scln has really had none yet......when the insiders have started to crank up a stock to then unload on the public it is usually done with all sorts of news,,,,,stock split or splits, earning reports.......a big merger....etc...these are to draw the attention of investors to create a retail market......sciclone is not ready for retail it is still in the manufacure stage. no exit strategy eeded ask me again in a couple of years

      • I will try....different stocks have different charactersitics and these characteristic limit their potential....the intersting thing about sciclone is the unlimited potential....even just partially curing viruses make this a drug with many applications.. The first characteristic is 'small cap'....i am buying sun micro with very limted goals it is a large cap stock ....I am buying sciclone with an open end..very few stocks are super stocks and to get 1000 percent [peter lynch proverbial 10 bagger] really requires a small enough cap to start. not micro cap but just not general electric.....once you have such a stock you must n e v e r sell.....the market will tell you when the growth is over bill gates will give stock away sell stock pay dividends etc etc laws of numbers catch up.....sciclone has potential of 4 billion in revenues if used for the many viruses already identified....these revenues could translate into a market cap 3 times the 4 billion..this is 100 times the current price not just 1000 percent but 10,000 %.....makes you want to change your medication doesnt it...thats 4 million for a 4000 investment....simple math.....[geeze I will hear about this from the bears will have to put them on ignore].[msft did it dell did it ibm did it and many others] . if zadaxin is real, n e v e r sell your stock.........its that simple...if your children are going hungry sell 100 shares....these opportunites do not come around every day.....I view, til proven wrong, that zadaxin replaces holistic medecine in its search to boost the immune system .... this is a 40 billion market and isnt even medecine this stupid peptine apparently even cures fungus infections.......the bodies immune system is strong in curing itself and zadaxin is the source of its power I need a drink a short downer on ice but this is my story and I am sticking with it...I am a chartist and this is the numbers a chart can produce....I have no information other than the posts on this board believe it or not. which is why I so often beg for clarification of the science. I think my new italian friends feel the same way and I look forward to meeting them one day as well as the smart people on this board. be it celebration or a wake. all in poker hope the stock sells off I will buy more in good position

13.125+0.095(+0.73%)May 27 4:00 PMEDT