Wait a minute. Brian Nichols of MF article yesterday proves how embarrassingly inaccurate and amateurish he can be!
If I am not mistaken, he conflates in the same paragraph without distinction for new readers the ongoing Rindo frontline phase III trial with the data released two weeks ago on the entirely separate ReACT trial, 12 versus 7.9 survival data.. If this is the case a retraction/clarification on his part is not a could be should be but must. Secondly, it is inaccurate and amateurish (of many embarrassingly transparent short message board post quality) to sweepingly put forth the pat assumption:
"A large public offering is not a sign of overwhelming confidence when released this close to significant data. (CDX-1135) The offering only adds more confusion, uncertainty, and questions as the data approaches.
1) Not necessarily and 2) By your own admission of the promising preclinical data on C3 and C5 and already proven Solaris drug by Alxn and everything to date on this entire pipeline unusually atypically 100% clinically impressive statistically and meaningfully (albeit we need further data on ReAct to lower p values , meaning larger trial size, but If the data holds, it is a given, but that is not the point). It is a sign of strength vis a vis here (not in death financing companies which are in the zillions) a big F you to pharma possible take over or pharma with respect to best potential deal vis a vis not take over but collaborations. You Brian A - ole cannot speak in sweeping generalizations, and there is no, none nada desperation to the breadth, depth and particulars of this company. The mgmt, is conservative, brilliant, smart and capable. You have to get beneath wowing readers to your general idiocy by complimenting their knee jerk think/talk idiocy. Do you do any DD?
The best way for you to view Celldex at this time is not as a can't-miss stock or a future flop, but rather as a company that is worthy of your eye until there is proof of long-term longevity."
Go back idiot! Read the clinical data from all trials to date. Look at the enterprise they are buildin
His sections on partnership and final thoughts were completely worthless. If he's confused by this action of the company, he shouldn't be writing articles about Celldex. Everyone who knows anything about this company knew it was perfect time for another offering and why. Apparently, he's invested in it for the takeover bid. Again, if he knew anything about Celldex, he'd realize what the long term goals are. His degrees in Psychology don't do any good when you don't know what the motivation factor is. And the ROI is in the simple math.
MF.... "fool" stands to reason... can't be wrong playing both sides. Celldex has a very high probability of being a homer... my 2 to 3% wins are base hits... and with promise of cancer suppression or cure.... David Reardon is no fool at Dana-Farber... highly involved with CLDX. "Dana-Farber is in the forefront of personalized cancer care. Many cancer therapists talk about individualizing cancer therapy: At Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, we are doing it by testing patients’ tumor samples for mutated genes that might match up with current or future drugs that target the patient’s specific mutations. We offer the first clinical trials for brain tumor patients that utilize exactly this approach. First, we perform a detailed analysis of an individual patient’s tumor, which takes about a week. Based on the results, we can recommend specific clinical trials that offer the patient the most promise and hope." "The Center for Neuro-Oncology is also leading several collaborations with other brain tumor centers and major pharmaceutical companies. Acting together, we are designing and implementing powerful clinical trials to analyze the genetic abnormalities of patients’ tumors and measure the effectiveness of drugs aimed at those abnormalities." "What are some of the challenges in treating brain tumors that you’re researching?
For one thing, glioblastomas — the most common and aggressive primary brain tumors — are genetically very complex. The tumor cells are driven by multiple abnormal gene pathways, so we’re starting to use combinations of targeted drugs in “cocktails” that can block several pathways at once." "In addition, glioblastoma cells are adept at developing resistance to chemotherapy. We can now measure some enzymes whose levels predict which patients are more likely to develop resistance to a given drug."
see balance on Dana-Farber site... know these folks well unfortunately.
No doubt he would have said similar comments about Celg. Amgn, etc 10 years ago. I would have rather bought Celg when it was .50 cent stock in the 1990's or 10.00 in 2004 than now as it pt was just raised above 200.00. IDIOT!
Increasingly, cancer researchers will come to the realization that surgery, chemo & radiation don't work in cases of advanced cancers. Immunology in combination with other drugs... possibly chemo... may very well work and might keep the patient from going toxic... I'd have you ask my Mom... but she's dead already... took her to Dana-faber & Sloan Kettering. She took it all.
Celldex is ... and will continue to be an acquisition target... with expiring patient protection and other variables... competition... thee who crosses the finish line first.. wins... a lot of the pharma's are in that boat. I'm done venting... what are these writers afraid of... a company's success??