Recent

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

Commerce Bancshares, Inc. Message Board

bearofbleecker 103 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 18, 2016 8:29 PM Member since: Jul 27, 2000
  • bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 4, 2016 2:47 PM Flag

    No small drug company can afford to market these drugs worldwide without help. And, in fact, this particular class of drugs is not profitable enough to sustain a dedicated sales force in the US. Which is why Ironwood is also representing Cologuard and has recently bought the US rights to the Astellas gout drug. As for losses, they had expected to become cash flow positive in 2017 prior to this purchase, but have now pushed this back to 2018.

  • bearofbleecker by bearofbleecker Jun 3, 2016 12:35 PM Flag

    But perhaps their hedges will offset the possible gains.

  • Reply to

    Way too obvious

    by nitabosco Jun 2, 2016 11:25 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 3, 2016 12:32 PM Flag

    I can't believe that "a busy important man" (your own self description) has time to reply to 1/6 of a person.

  • Reply to

    Linzess approaching $5 Billion valuation

    by bigredislost Jun 2, 2016 8:20 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 8:34 PM Flag

    Oh. Sorry. Someone should probably let Allergan know so that they can stop sending Ironwood all that money.

  • Reply to

    Linzess approaching $5 Billion valuation

    by bigredislost Jun 2, 2016 8:20 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 8:30 PM Flag

    After predicting imminent doom for IRWD, longs here are now saying, "Look how well Linzess is doing! That means great things for us!" AGN owns 50% of the profits in the US - and pays 50% of the marketing expenses. Ironwood gets 45 - 55% of the profits from the sales of Linzess in China and the rest of asia, and pays none of the developmental or marketing costs. I assume that the European arrangement, which AGN inherited from Almirall, is more like the Asian model.

  • bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 8:20 PM Flag

    It's not a 23% short ratio. A short ratio is the number of average volume trading days it would take to cover the outstanding short position. 23% was the percentage of the float that was short on 5/13. When the end of month figures are released, I assume that number will be smaller, although I hope not. If you were short IRWD on 5/13, you've already lost 30% of your investment.
    You analogy is silly. SGYP isn't in any position to "pick off" anything. They don't even have an approved drug. And if they had an approved drug, they wouldn't have any way to bring it to market. The best case scenario would be for the company to stay in business long enough to dilute the stock a couple of more times.

  • Says he added more to his short position at the close today. Meanwhile, he's over here denying that he's doing any such thing. I said not long ago that 12.50 was my yearend price target for IRWD. But it looks like the shorts are going to drive it higher.

  • bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 7:58 PM Flag

    Yes, the IBB apparently made a bottom on May 12. Since then, it has rebounded 13.6%. The small cap pharmas, though - most of which are not even represented in the IBB - have done much better. Of course, they suffered much worse than the large caps on the way down. Which confirms my belief that you should cautiously accumulate these stocks as they drop.

  • Reply to

    Warning.............

    by nypd2726 Jun 2, 2016 3:37 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 7:48 PM Flag

    Fair enough. My only theme has been that it is unnecessarily risky to put too many eggs in one basket. Particularly in a pharma stock, where all kinds of unexpected events can occur. When that short raid on IRWD broke, I immediately sold all but 1,500 shares. I still came out slightly ahead... and what if they had been right? Even after I was convinced that the stock was being defended, I still didn't buy all of my position back.

  • Reply to

    Warning.............

    by nypd2726 Jun 2, 2016 3:37 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 7:43 PM Flag

    I know I waste my time on here, but I don't have nearly enough time to waste to post the way aisan does. But thanks for confirming that you were just SAYING that you were shorting IRWD and, like most of the longs here, are just smalltime daytrading BS artists.

  • Reply to

    booboo says

    by stu_pitt_brads_smarter_brother Jun 2, 2016 5:19 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 5:34 PM Flag

    Yes, last July, when indiansfan and the other sages here were prophesizing doom for Ironwood and a big rally for Synergy, I did not buy Synergy. Nor did I sell Ironwood. On July 30, the day I first posted here, Synergy was at 9.50 and Ironwood was at 10.43. Silly me.

  • Reply to

    I did what ?

    by stu_pitt_brads_smarter_brother Jun 2, 2016 5:16 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 5:29 PM Flag

    PS It's funny that you smalltime daytraders can't resist fantasizing at the end of a rally, and imagining that you actually HELD the stock through the whole thing.

  • Reply to

    I did what ?

    by stu_pitt_brads_smarter_brother Jun 2, 2016 5:16 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 5:24 PM Flag

    What are you babbling about now? I gather that the gist of your message is that you are NOT short Ironwood, even though you are posting on that board repeatedly to the contrary? Okay, sorry if I took you at your word. I have never pretended to be short SGYP, although I tried to get a few thousand shares short a couple of times just to prove that it couldn't be done. It can't. Not by a civilian, anyway.

  • bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 5:13 PM Flag

    I think you have blown your SGYP profits on your IRWD short, stu. I would never own SGYP for more than a day. Two, at the most. I would never be short the stock, either. (Even if that were possible.) Although I posted that I had rebought most of my IRWD position just below 10, you seem to live in an alternative reality. Good luck with that IRWD short, though. When they held it at 13 again today I knew they were waiting for the suckers to swallow the hook a little deeper and added some more.

  • Reply to

    Warning.............

    by nypd2726 Jun 2, 2016 3:37 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 5:03 PM Flag

    Well, stu, you've been over on the IRWD board repeatedly posting that you're adding to your short and saying that the stock is about to collapse. As I posted at the time, I sold my IRWD at just under 10 and bought back most of my position a few days later at the same price. I have added small chunks since then - usually whenever you call a top. Yes, I missed the move up on SGYP. On purpose. As you know, I mistrust the stock and their management. Since the IBB bottomed on May 12, a lot of these small cap pharma stocks have done well. I think that ACHN, XNCR, OTIC, and several others are much more attractive acquisition targets than a me-too laxative with no money in the bank and the need for a huge cash infusion.

  • Reply to

    Warning.............

    by nypd2726 Jun 2, 2016 3:37 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 4:31 PM Flag

    I agree that there is room in the marketplace for plecanatide. In a recent conference call, the marketing director of Ironwood said the same thing. But someone has to step up to the plate and put up the money to market the drug. I also don't think that the success of Linzess will necessarily speed up the adoption of plecanatide.

  • Reply to

    Warning.............

    by nypd2726 Jun 2, 2016 3:37 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 2, 2016 4:15 PM Flag

    This is not important news for any SGYP longs ... except those who, like stu, indiansfan, barfonbroker, etc., followed the Phase IV Research raiders into a short of IRWD. Since that fateful day, April 26, SGYP is up 25 cents. IRWD is up $2.95. The more fortunate of these simply had their puts vaporized. However, many actually shorted the stock. As of 5/13, 23.1% of IRWD's float was short. On that same day, only 11.62% of SGYP's float was short. ( And, since there are never shares available to borrow for retail speculators, I'll wager that all of those short shares were in the hands of the MM's.)
    Incidentally, if you were long SGYP, why would you have to double down on the same bet by shorting IRWD?
    Despite the oft-expressed belief that SGYP is about to take IRWD's business, the two stocks have little in common. IRWD is a bet on how quickly they can turn a profit and start moving those big carryover losses to the other side of the balance sheet. SGYP is strictly a bet on the possibility of the company being acquired or partnered with.

  • When the category rebounds, these small caps tend to rebound more dramatically. Of course, the reverse is also true, unfortunately.

  • Reply to

    where is the VOLUME ?

    by stu_pitt_brads_smarter_brother Jun 1, 2016 1:47 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 1, 2016 6:17 PM Flag

    PS There are no small time buyers here. Which is demonstrated by the silence on Stocktwits. The small time buyers are all into SGYP. (Except for Paulson, of course - demonstrably the worst hedge fund manager over the past 4 years.)

  • Reply to

    where is the VOLUME ?

    by stu_pitt_brads_smarter_brother Jun 1, 2016 1:47 PM
    bearofbleecker bearofbleecker Jun 1, 2016 6:14 PM Flag

    Does this mean that you're not going to cover your short until it hits 8, Stu? I think you just had some cheap puts, which have now been rendered worthless.

CBSH
49.70+0.28(+0.57%)Aug 26 4:00 PMEDT