I haven't wanted to post this week as the board was overwhelmed with new interest. But given the unprecedented drop below the secondary offering price (nice job, JP Morgan!), I thought I should offer some thoughts. First, I hope everyone reading this had a good week and can afford to keep shares invested for the long term. Because the volatility only affects you if you are on margin or have bills to pay with the money invested. With that said . . . .
The only reason to break $8.49 that would have made sense was if there were a safety issue. There isn't.
The shorts are floating an idea that the iron levels were actually too high. That is false, but it points out one of the major advantafges of the trial. As Dr. Lewis pointed out, the trial told us more about iron than it did about the phophate binding (which was great by the way). That is because it appears that many patients achieved homeostasis with respect to iron levels. For these patients, IV iron will no longer be administered. And, they will be at a level that their respective bodies (in the bodies' infinite wisdom) has determined to be the highest best level possible. So, a corresponding drop in the necessary levels of ESA . . .
This also means that iron induced anemia is a likely indication. There are no approved oral supplements for this indication. IV iron delivers a bolus and is not ideal in many other respects such as mode of administration and the associated expense.
And pre-dialysis approval - with a corresponding monopoly - should be a lock.
Bottom line: weakness is an opportunity. Seize it. The stock should be at $20 by the end of the year and will likely be bought out north of there.
From the press release, there was an over allotment of the $8.49 secondary offering. what caused the run to the sell-off then just a day later? Did someone in the press say something or an analyst report that caused this? There isn't any news to reflect and the volume was HUGE again.
Nope - not a trained scientist. But am an ex-pharma exec. I have owned the stock since 2009 because of Z. It is the pharmaco-economics here that are jaw-dropping. Savings of $750 MM per year for dialysis patients in the US alone is a stunning number. And that doesn't take into account the pre-dialysis or iron induced anemia opportunities.
Bottom line is that the only thing that would stop the shares from going even higher fast - once everyone has done the work - is safety. And here I do have some expertise. Basically, homoeostasis is the body's way of self-regulating. That is why there were no safety issues in the trial and why Dr. Lewis said that the trial revealed so much about iron's role in the body. The science of anemia is fascinating.
Because all other oral iron supplements don't work (they are not absorbed in the gut as ferric citrate is), scientists have not been able to achieve stable iron levels in anemia patients or to determine the optimal level of iron versus ESA's (erythropeitin stimulating agents). Using IV iron - because it is delivered in a burst - doesn't achieve this equilibrium. But Zerenex does. So this is really important stuff!
Again, if there were a safety issue, it would be HUGE. But the reason that there isn't a safety issue is precisely the reason why the drug has so much promise.