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

SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

  • psmack10 psmack10 Oct 30, 1998 4:59 PM Flag


    I have been a long time holder of this stock and
    I am curious to know what the future holds for this
    Co. Considering this is the only Biotech stock in my
    portfolio I am not accustomed to this thing called "waiting
    for the FDA". I venture back to this board
    occasionally to read the extremely informative posts, but it
    seems that this stock has, for all intensive purposes,
    stalled. I guess my question that I pose for all board
    readers is what "realistically" is in this company's
    future? Are we headed down a management-laden path to the
    sewer with sub-par drugs or is that same team of
    professionals going to take us and the wonderful drugs to the
    promise land. I know that I am throwing a temper tantrum
    and should have more hope for the drugs and the
    people who could benefit but I would like to see
    something solid come out in a press release from the Co. So
    please, someone give my portfolio and me some good news!

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • with this companies stock price being flat after
      a while some investors will be forced to sell their
      shares thus reducing the price of the stock.As most of
      you know I don't go long on companies with negative
      earnings per share(EPS

    • I was confused with the recent purchase quantity as opposed to total held quantity. If Sellers has 500,000 shares then I feel better about SCLN.

    • Buying by anyone in the open market, be it
      insiders or just us patient souls does not prolong the
      companies life. The money flows to the seller.
      Even you

      lasermate2 should know this, so quit talking HUMBUG , OK..

    • Seller's may have options to buy 500,000 sh but
      he owns outright a fraction of that amount. Fact is
      we would all be better off if he bought more at
      these levels and had his own money at risk rather than
      merely the lost opportunity of out of the money options.
      At least Singh has the guts to buy sstock outright
      that represents a far greater sacrifice than anything
      Sellers has done.

    • lm2,

      I'd normally share your cynicism &
      skepticism. Sellers already owns over 500,000 shares, and the
      officers and directors together own over 8% of the company
      according to the annual proxy statment.

      If I had
      that kind of investment, I'd be trying to make it grow
      and busily diversify my protfolio all the



    • It's not quite gone yet.

      I still feel
      that the small amount of insider buying is done to
      fool more people to buy.

      Consider that the CEO
      has a $500,000 per year paycheck along with who knows
      what kind of bonus payouts. At $1 1/4 per share he
      only buys 15000 shares? He should know where SCLN is
      going. If the future seemed bright, I'd expect him to
      load up with 50000 or more shares. On the other hand,
      if the small share purchase extends the life of the
      company by only a few months (by tricking us to buy),
      then his paychecks will more than offset the purchase
      of the 15000 shares. It's good business for all the
      SCLN officers to make small stock puchases since
      "insider buying" looks good.

    • mdc,

      Thanks. That is an interesting
      strategic piece.

      What is going on in the world?
      Schering-Plough is (was?) collaborating with SCLN in Japan but
      seems to be taking other approaches elsewhere. What is
      the reason SCLN is having trouble with this good
      product? Zadaxin doesn't even get honorable mention in
      most discussions about hepatitis or hepatitis drugs.
      Neither BCHE nor GILD seem to know SCLN exists. Or are
      they spoofing?

      I can see the pricing problem
      with countries like China but presumably only the
      wealthy can afford treatment there, anyway. Hope the
      price stays up since a cheap product in China and an
      expensive one in Japan could lead to "grey market" price
      competition. I have an image of little grey men in the dark of
      night navigating treacherous waters in small boats full
      of the hope of making small fortunes by--you guessed
      it--buy low, sell high.



    • My knowledge of the situation is this....zadaxin
      is definitely effective, and so far is the only drug
      that works anywhere near this well. Right now sales
      have been in china for hepatitis C indications, not
      for hep B as studied in the phase II trials released
      2 days ago, but the efiicacy should be near the
      same. The drug is only selling in a country where
      medications are very inexpensive, thus low profits. I think
      the million in sales is excellent given these things.
      As time progresses and sales are begun in more
      markets, as well as for the hep B indications, they should
      go through the roof. However in my opinion this is
      not what we are waiting for....sciclone recently
      acquired worldwide rights to zadaxin, a pivitol piece that
      was in the way of gaining a new collaboration. What I
      think we can expect is announcement of a collaborator
      in the next 1 1/2-3 months. This should drive the
      price of the stock through the roof...

    • Agree, respect is earned. However, I respect the
      RIGHT (not the person) to say anything you want
      regardless of whether I respect the source. I have the
      option of ignoring what I don't like or believe. A
      certain amount of blather is tolerable and sometimes
      entertaining. Think about it.

      As for SHMN, the relevance
      is that it is (almost) a one product company which
      is experiencing a run-up in anticipation of an
      approval in mid-1999. SCLN is a one product company. It
      has Zadaxin on the market and CPX in the wings with
      no real attention-getting panache and no respect.
      There are not many one-product companies out there in
      the Biotech world. SCLN should be doing better. Is it
      "undiscovered?" Is it a financial wallflower? Has it no sex
      appeal? SHMN is sexy because it uses rain forest
      ingredients and has tribal medicine men as advisors. Its
      financing is equally exotic.

      Meanwhile, BCHE has
      gotten approval in the US for lamivudane for hepatitis
      without showing real efficacy. SCLN's trials around the
      world (if I read them right) show efficacy in
      combination with interferon that exceeds treatment with
      interferon alone. How does everyone else read that? If so,
      why isn't Zadaxin getting a real push?


    • Respect is earned. What is the remained of your post referring to? Is SCICLONE involved?

    • View More Messages
10.31Sep 27 4:00 PMEDT