MYRX is ranked the third on NASDAQ 100 top buying list based on the technical analysis.
ok, just remember, for shareholders to vote YES on the liquidation, they need to get better that $3.90/share or the whole involvement of investment bank is pointless. I'd be happy with $4.50, but right now it is this time of the season when IPOs and M&As are in vogue, so we can get some premium. This is of course if management moves quickly!
I think if they were to get some low ball bid for it, at the very least, MYGN would come back in like mommy dearest and snap it back up for at least $3
it would be worth it for them to pull the assets back into the once long ago parent corp
I predict it goes for about $4
just my opinions
good luck all
I'm predicting a lot less; a range that includes zero. And I'm also predicting that the 4 will among them someday sell over $500MM a year. Heck of a deal for somebody.
For the nth time: you treat it as trash, you'll get a trash price for it.
Azixa, as it sits, would be worth roughly $100MM if it was treated as a valuable salable asset. That assumes about 1000 patients a year getting it for 2 months at $100K a month, less a big discount. You treat it as garbage, it sells like garbage. (Ok, on another message board I repeated my boring estimate that "ownership" of a drug is worth about one year's sales. A numbers junkie showed me [many] examples that it's worth about twice that to a going business and 4 times that to a takeover candidate) Again: this drug works AT LEAST as well as the phase 2s show (treatment was discontinued too soon in many subjects) and unless someone was committed enough to break criminal laws, all the adverse events were reported. 2-3% of people with exactly zero chance going in of living two more months appear to have been cured.
The IKKE program is an entree to a market that is about $40 bln. today (rheumatoid arthritis). Developed through phase 1 (about a year and 20-30 MM), a candidate could be 50:50 partnered for $100MM (I've seen examples), which means it should fetch a bit more than that on outright sale.
The other 2 anti-cancer programs should have some value. The one that recently finished a phase 1 is at least non-toxic. The other one ought to be given a phase 1 to spiff it up a bit for sale.
The IP behind prodrug development ought to be marketable too. Solubility is A Very Big Deal in developing a useful drug, and the results achieved on those anticancer drugs were impressive.
In brief, we seem to be getting robbed.
On what are you basing your $250M valuation? Nothing in their pipeline, including Azixa, is worth anywhere close to that amount. That's the whole issue. If they had something of greater value it would be worth the remaining $103M they have to develop it. They don't, due to Hobden's poor job of managing things.
It really looks like they're going to give the IP away and split the cash (less golden parachutes and bankers' fees) with shareholders. And with the employees scattered to the winds first, it'll be a take it or leave it vote. I actually had shares in a company where the vote went
It's a severe lowball estimate to put the IP portfolio at $250MM and the way they're handling it I doubt that they'll get 10.
Yeah, it's breach of fiduciary duty. Who is going to sue them?
If the final price for MYRX comes at $2, none of the shareholder will vote for the deal as they know the company has $3.90/share. The fact that all activity has stopped means that Lollini is conserving the current $3.90 cash per share. Many investors bought MYRX at much higher prices, so for them to vote YES one any deal, they have to be happy with the final price.
Huh? One phase 2 trial was started but not completed (the "ongoing" one) There was one on melanoma metastatic to the brain, which worked about as well as the GBM trials (but at the time Avastin wasn't the behemoth it is now, and except for Roche's hostility melanoma is a less attractive target for quick introduction[longer survival makes for longer trials]). There were essentially 1-case trials on some other cancers (I forget, but I think they were technically phase 1) a long time back in hope of finding the best target.
Yeah, there is dose-limiting cardiotoxicity which combines with the concentration in CNS to limit the possible disease targets, and early on there were hemorrhages connected with over-aggressive treatment.
The actual phase 2s vs GBM showed that the treatment protocol being explored was wrong (look back: radiologic progression DOES SOMETIMES reflect edema in a tumor mass with a crashing cell count). Treatment was being discontinued too soon. One of the long-term survivors is scored as a non-responder because of this. The other one is scored as a partial response, probably for a different reason). That is one of the things the suspended phase 2 was intended to address. You need to know how to administer a drug before you plan a phase 3.
A lot of things can be hidden, but adverse events in a US clinical trial can't be. What else? Azixa is cheap to make. Administering it is a problem, but not beyond some other cancer drugs that are used. No drug in use or talked about is spectacularly good against cancers in the brain. The big special obstacle is that Roche will defend Avastin's territory fanatically now that its use against breast cancer is deprecated.
What you are failing to take into account is that there were additional phase II trials that were never completed. Given that no phase III trials were ever started, even with $103M in the bank, there has to be a reason, which is not always visible on the surface.