The best management metric I know of is past stock price performance. Be careful, because Yahoo dropped 16 years of CRY stock price history. Why Yahoo did this is a mystery to me. Go to Google Finance, type in CRY and then click on ‘all” years. This will show CRY’s stock history back to the 1993-94 period. You will see a big run-up around 2000, when the tissue business was doing well. Then CRY put some contaminated tissue out into the market place. CRY’s stock price then crashed. Google Brian Lykins for this history. After the FDA got finished with CRY, the tissue cost centers never again made much (if any) profit.
The point here is this. In order for a company to do well, the most important thing the company needs is great management. When you look at the CRY stock chart, it seems to me that management’s past performance is suspect. SA has been the CEO for most/all of this past period. Hence, my conclusion is that SA is not an effective manager when it comes to adding shareholder value.
When a large company buys a small company such as CRY, they not only want something that the small company has, but in addition there usually needs to be some management chemistry present. SA may lack this chemistry. .
Robin Young, in one or more of his publications called SA ‘the bad boy of biotech’. I can’t be sure of this, but I suspect SA has was reputation of being difficult to get along with. If this is the case, that would be another thing weighing against a buy-out.
I suspect too that CRY does have some things in its line-up that some other companies could license and market successfully. But I wonder if this never happens because of SA’s ‘bad boy’ reputation. I’m not judging Robin Young’s comment, but rather just putting it out there.