Hey, haven't had a good laugh/scream today, here's one!
Excerpt from an October 17, 2011 Enzon PR:
"Enzon also announced today that the Board of Directors has formed a special committee to oversee the Company's scientific and clinical development. The committee is comprised of Directors Richard A. Young, Ph.D., who will act as chairman, and Thomas F. Deuel, M.D.
Dr. Young has served as a director of Enzon since April 2010. He is a member of the Whitehead Institute and a professor of biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. An Enzon director since April 2010, Dr. Deuel is adjunct professor of molecular and experimental medicine and cell biology, The Scripps Research Institute, and professor of medicine emeritus at Harvard Medical School. "
In case you're not current on the bod, these guys are still with us, picking up something like $200K a year I might add.
But of course the best part, the belly buster, is the spectacular job their special committe has done.
They "oversaw" the scientific direction and clinical deveplopments that took the then PEGylation powerhouse Enzon (~$400m mc) with clinical programs, discovery IP and technical teams, add about $100m in R&D monies since forming their committee, and have oversaw for us the creation of an IP equivalent of a blackhole. $1 million dollars in shareholder value.
Holy moly, are these guys on top of their game or what?
What do you say shareholders, do you think we should give these guys a lifetime membership seat on the board? All those in favor bend over!
the key issue they can come out clean is a reasonable percentage of royalty money generated by these buyers from using these technologies sold. If that is not in reasonable range, they should be blamed!
I'd agree with this argument had the tech been sold to a legitimate pharma that might further develop it. Instead, it was sold to what looks like a holding company--no?. Pointless. It'd be nice to at least get a press release-- someone from Enzon to explain the thought process here. Maybe the royalty percentage is huge-- we don't know. Maybe they really couldn't find a buyer, so sold the IP to Belrose who will then get private funding to develop the tech and produce some revenue for Enzon through these royalties. Maybe it was too much of a risk for enzon to spend the cash to further develop the tech, but Icahn still believed in it, so took it private while still giving enzon royalties. Maybe this was the best deal they could get. Lazard would know.
Well of course y my point in the above post is meant to be ironic. The irony being, either these people and their credentials are a sham, or managment is running a scam. It's got to be one, or the other.
The idea that this Belrose deal is somehow a good outcome for shareholders, 'if we just wait a few years and then we'll see' is hard, let me rephrase that, is impossible to swallow at this point.
Waiting on future royalties from the sale of the IP to Belrose is so shrouded in vaugness, along with the upfront outragiously low transfer price, one can only conclude that the value is so tenuous and minimal that the bod members failed, or if the value is there, but not reflected in the deal, then management is stupid, or selfserving (fraudulent).
I don't personally believe it's stupidity on the part of managment. Which of the other two possibilities is debatable. It's my hope, speculation, and bias that MIT and Harvard still stand for excellence, and the people they allow to use their names do so as well. But then you never know, maybe management was star struck, and now they're, what, aghast? Okay! Then throw the bums out!!!! Now!!!! Show us you're rational. Or, show us you're crooks!