% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Dendreon Anonim Ortaklik Message Board

  • Saul_Kerpelman Saul_Kerpelman Nov 19, 2004 5:09 PM Flag

    unethical analyst

    Yes, without doubt he attempted to get information unethically and probably illegally. But merely bashing the messenger is no good. He got caught by that one doctor and therefore did not succeed in getting the inside info he was seeking and which he undoubtedly intended to trade on or help his clients trade on (again a felony--and I suppose since he admitted what he did Spitzer could prosecute him for attempt to commit a felony if his then employer had a NY office). But what is the rest of the story? Did he unethically somehow succeed in getting inside info on the Genta trial? Did he act in similar fashion then to Genta as he is treating Dndn now? We know how Genta played out. Is it possible that by again using some unethical means--we know it's his inclination--he has gotten a look at the unpublished numbers and is using them scoop the rest of the analysts who are ethically awaiting the publication of the numbers? The guy has proven himself dishonest and willing to commit a crime to get info to trade on. Given his report today, I have to admit it scares me that he may be pretending to extrapolate when he really has again improperly obtained inside info.

    Anyone know more about his handling of Genta? Seems likely his call, if it does turn out to have been amazingly prescient and ahead of the pack, may justly land him in prison. But that won't help those of us who will have lost a bundle on Dndn by then if he does in fact have some inside info that approval is unlikely.

    Can anyone definitively poke holes in his "reasoning"?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I looked at a lot of GNTA upgrades and downgrades but did not see any done this retarded brean murray or what ever what are u referring to when u say his rating on GNTA and comparing it to the downgrade of DNDN???

      Anyway to me a share price going up amidst skepticism and dpwngrades longer term is very healthy and indicates big gains coming.

      • 1 Reply to luv_dndn
      • That time this 'prick' wan't with Brean Murray, but with other brokerage firm.

        "Analysts at better-known firms are getting in on the action. One is Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group Inc. in Arlington, Va., the 12th-ranked U.S. stock underwriter this year. Friedman Billings analyst Jonathan Aschoff says he was just trying to get the real story when he impersonated a doctor in early March.

        First he sent an e-mail to Dr. Cunningham, the oncologist involved with trials of Genta's experimental cancer drug, requesting a progress update. When it went unanswered, Mr. Aschoff says he telephoned on March 13, posing as a "Dr. Rosen" who had a leukemia patient interested in enrolling in the trial. The alias came from the movie "Fletch," where Chevy Chase pretends to be a doctor by that name, says Mr. Aschoff.

        Dr. Cunningham, who works at a cancer center in Dallas, says he talked to the caller about the progress of the trials and the side effects seen. He says he mentioned some shrinking of the "lymphadenopathy," which means swollen lymph nodes. "What's that?" the caller asked.

        Dr. Cunningham, his suspicions aroused, said he had to run but would call back with some even better information if he could just have "Dr. Rosen's" phone number. Racing to his computer and rummaging through old e-mails, he found that the number was the same as the one Mr. Aschoff had given in the e-mail request days earlier. "I was mad as hell," Dr. Cunningham says. He called Mr. Aschoff and "chewed him out." He says he told the analyst his behavior was "unethical in the extreme. I don't appreciate being pulled out of patient care to talk to someone who is lying to me."

        Mr. Aschoff's defense: "Companies are saying to investors, `Give me your money.' Are you going to give it to idiots who go off unchecked? I'm trying to bring the truth to investors." He acknowledges lying about being a doctor but says it was for the greater good of unearthing the truth.

        Friedman Billings says it provides objective analysis of about 400 companies, demanding "the highest standard of ethical, professional behavior" of all employees."

    • Never heard about Brean Murray this firm, do they have any holding in DNDN???

    • That is right, Gold did say the data has already been submitted.

      So the stupid analyst at Brean is betting that DNDN is going to release weak data in front of a packed house. He thinks that DNDN can "go for broke' and pull a sham on the entire medical community in a public forum. This guy is not really stupid--- he is a CROOK and he should be in jail.

      I sure wish others in the analyst community would come out and call this Brean Murray crook out. I doubt they will do it because it is a comfortable fraternity.

    • Thanks Batgirl. I guess we do not have a clear answer. However, there are always exceptions and late submissions that are accepted at such conferences if the committee perceives them as late breaking data from previously unpublished Phase III trials.

      We can only hope.

    • ...Saul...

      What happened to your "calm down" post?
      Seems like you're getting all caught up in the "what ifs" just like those you were telling to "calm down" to earlier in the day!

      I mean how far does everyone want to attempt to extrapolate the conclusions contained in the BM report? Plain and simple "Analyst Day", however well intentioned, was a PR nightmare. Analysts came to the meeting hoping to get the inside scoop on some very favorable press that DNDN had released just a week prior. When that wasn't forthcoming one enterprising analyst apparently took it upon himself to draw his own conclusions. He had no facts other than those the other analysts had...just far worse logic! There was no "leak" of trial information!...Give me a break. To imply such would be to believe that no such negative informational "leak" existed when the stock went from 8.60 to 13 just a week or so ago, but then suddenly it was leaked" just in time for the "Analyst Day" meeting and option expirations??! Doesn't make any sense.

      No...IMHO this was simply a situation where the analysts and the firms in attendance had to finally face the reality that there will be no immediate investment banking business coming from this company...No debt offerings..No partnership deals...No couple hundred million dollars to invest...No nothing. So why stick their necks out..for what? You be the anlaysts...What's the "safest" thing to do?

      Wait for the actual data to be announced.
      So the BM guy is upset because Gold implied we'd have a partnership by now and not only do we not...we probably have no intentions of having one in the US period.. So his "safety net" in his recommendation is gone. No big pharma validated the DNDN vaccine platform by buying into the company. So he "implies" something is wrong with the company or the data. Simple logic...simple reasoning.

      Having been burnt by Genta he's not looking for another one so he's playing the "better safe than sorry" game and attempting to support it by factual innuendos...IMHO he's simply telling clients to sell now at $10 and if the data pans out, and the stock rallies to $15, he'll tell them to buy back in!

      Let's all try and not read anymore into this then we already have. Wait for the facts.

    • I'll leave it to others to poke holes in his reasoning but I can say this about gnta (as a former investor in that near fraud that managed to get out in the nick of time) visa vie dndn: gnta never published anything of merit in peer revue journals and, rather than focus on a specific malignancy with a "targeted therapy" aa dndn is doing, they simple had a piece of antisense dna looking for a cancer in which it might work. In other words, a drug in search of a disease. Also their ceo, R Warrel, was extremely incautious in his public remarks and never had anything resembling the panel dndn assembled yesterday. In addition a no of prominent oncologists published data suggesting that genasense did not work as described. Finally, all their data indicated that the side effects of genasense were extremely harsh and might be difficult to deal with. It would not have been difficult to issue a sell on gnta. And a no of analysts besides BM were very negative.

    • I agree with you, somebody knows something
      we do not know. Every time GOLD talks, DNDN
      goes down. Why is so secrative about the emrollment numbers?