"That might have a minor short term effect but there is no way drug companies are going to allow major amounts of their drugs to be shipped to Canada at lower cost and then be resold to the US market."
Vin the notion was not one I thought of myself, it's already being discussed in Congress. My opinion is that it probably will not happen, but I am certain the idea will be floated again and used as threat to help drive a compromise. I already get weekly calls from Canadian Pharmacy and Sven and Lars' accents have a suspiciously Bengal ring to them.
""my point was I wasn't going to continue the line of discussion beyond that final post..."
I get it. You had good intentions and you were going to let it die right? How likely is it that after gratuitously insulting roughly half of the readership your's would be the last word on the subject? Then tell me that you wouldn't decide to jump back in again because someone else said something outrageous. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. We are mostly opinionated type A personalities with some really great ideas to share, but lets acknowledge this isn't the venue when those ideas have political overtones.
I drove down to buy my son and his roommate breakfast so I was on the road this morning. I pulled over for the open and bought some @ 7.07. I checked again at 9:45 and saw it in the 6.90's. I put in an order @ 6.95 and just just missed a fill. I got home and saw that someone had dumped 100K on the market and the sp was in the 6.90's for about 4 minutes. If this is the correction, it sure was a small window of opportunity. Hey, if it checks a box for the TA guys and makes a run at another 52 week high permissible, I'm all for it.
As per Franca I guess next opportunity for a positive CHMP recommendation is the June 20-23 meeting.
"The question is, how big now, is it all or the majority hedged or not. If not, they could get squeezed, but you are saying the convertibles hang over this, making that unlikely."
To the first point. "Is the majority hedged..."
We don't know. Institutions are required to quarterly report their holdings and this includes common stock and bonds. If one were to check the filings, one would see that the current largest holder of the bonds is a JPM hedge fund and the largest holder of the common is Fidelity. A gaping hole in the reporting system is that institutions are not required to report their short holdings. So again, we don't know.
"IF the convertible holders want to ride this, they will not want to be short. So either way, if you see a continuing stream of good news, and you see convertible holders wanting to make money, what exactly would they do if now short/hedged?"
The beauty of a hedged position is that you lock in a small gain with little to no risk. Hedge funds are called HEDGE funds for a reason. You are absolutely correct, IF the HF's want to assume the market risk in order to fully realize the anticipated appreciation of the underlying security, they can close out the short and keep the bond. If the guy at High Bridge (the JPM HF) were to do this, I suspect he would get a call from his boss asking him #$%$ are you doing? We are a HF, not a mutual fund!
"And short position ripe for huge squeeze."
Okay Eric, here are a few facts for you. First, if the folks here seem a bit sensitive about short squeeze predictions, you have to cut them some slack. The predictions have come daily since at least 2008 when I started posting and that oft promised, yet rarely seen short squeeze hasn't materialized. The facts I promised. Short squeezes are supply demand events only obliquely related to the fundamental prospects of the underlying security. The present supply demand situation for available shares to short is not tight. Fidelity lists 11+M shares available and is only charging a 1/2 % carrying charge. I have seen it as high as 6%. When the bonds are converted, 54 million treasury shares will be issued to the holders. I have no idea how many of those shares will be used to close out existing short positions, but I suspect it is a substantial percentage. Those short positions hedged by bonds are essentially squeeze proof.
Hey folks, keep it a politics free zone. No subtle insults, no naming candidates. As amazing as it seems, half the stupid people reading this mb are going to vote for the other inferior candidate. Accept it, compartmentalize it, and keep it out of your posts.
"I'm not getting into politics with you, believe what you wish, those living on Fantasy Island always do."
I'll throw the BS flag. Your whole post has political overtones. Either of the candidates will have to deal with spiraling healthcare costs. As far as cutting the cost of drugs, you already have a Canadian or European model to follow. You can argue all day about whether it is good or bad or fair or not fair, but negotiated drug costs are coming. A quick fix is to simply allow imported drugs. Again, not without problems, but doable.
"yes, if this really is the break out of the "cup and handle pattern" then a retest of the breakout area 6.90 /7.00 /7,10 is likely."
Did you ratchet your expectation up a few notches on where it might correct back to? I did pick up some trading shares at the close with fill at 613. I would really like the opportunity to stock back up again at 6.80-6.90, but I will not complain if the opportunity does not materialize.
Clem, yes he was talking about Cobi/Atezo. Cobimetinib is an Exelixis compound partnered with Roche Genentech.
Snow. Thx for sharing the contract site. Very interesting. Even though only the front page shows on the preview, the search function still pulls up bits of scrpt from the entire document. They do edit out things they consider proprietary like the royalty rates.
"So those are the knowns, possible outliers?"
You have to add ESMO in early October. The Apolo Cabo/Nivo trial will present its first look and that would be a likely venue for CaboSun. Looking toppy so took my trading profit at 7.19 and will be watching the close for a possible fade and another purchase.
Need some trading shares. I wanted something to sell yesterday but wasn't willing to let any of my core go. It's due for a correction, but the story is intact and the rally is legitimate.
"...and I find it hard to believe that a doctor could be so small as to taunt someone, provoke so one, attempt to rub someone nose in it."
Here's the thing. You've chosen to go to bat for a rather unpopular figure here. Playing the bully card isn't a good choice either. There is a legal concept known as clean hands. As Semanresu was something of a bully himself, his hands are not very clean. There were a lot of people here with very substantial losses, some who could afford it and some who couldn't and Semanresu did not show any restraint in rubbing their noses in it incessantly, and doing his best to shake them out of their shares at the worst possible time. He bashed right up until the moment he chose to go long, by his actions conceding the long argument from this mb, but never giving any credit to those to helped him profit.
If you want to point out the futility of baiting him when the likelihood of him seeing it is questionable, you have a point. But if your looking to generate sympathy for the unsympathetic, you're not likely to get much traction.
We obviously don't have a full copy of the "collaboration agreement." A few things we can infer from the C&P from the 10K, Genentech is the determiner of the revenue and cost sharing split, but if EXEL choses to dispute Genentech's determination, then there is a resolution process that involves arbitration. Arbitration is not a voluntary process. The participants have previously agreed to abide by the arbiter's findings and truly independent arbitrations are rarely overturned by subsequent litigation. My point is that there is a dispute and it could drag out for several months, but there will be a resolution outside of the courtroom and EXEL and Roche should have a better handle on the parameters and metrics of their partnership going forward.
I agree with you about the Roche downplaying the value of Cotellic. They are in a bit of a Catch 22 though as they have to move the drug through the clinical trial process and that progress is tough to hide. I mentioned the trial in TNBC. Did not notice initially that it does expand into a randomized placebo controlled phase. Paclitaxel +/- Cobi in frontline TNBC. Historic ORR rate for paclitaxel monotherapy is about 35% and of short duration. TNBC is a large indication comprising 15% of all BC and is an indication with a critical unmet need. Another candidate for breakthrough. Paclitaxel is a generic, so for Roche to generate a return on this investment, they can't discount Cobi to sweeten up the return on one of their pipeline drugs.
"there appears to be potential for litigation, I'm betting we see a lot of carefully selected verbiage as data matures and asset valuations become better understood for their clinical prowess. My read is that Cobi may pack more wallop than previously recognized..."
First, from the last quarterly report:
"A portion of the liability for those costs, identified as Accrued collaboration liability on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, includes commercialization expenses that Genentech has allocated to the collaboration but are in dispute. To date, we believe Genentech’s cost and revenue allocations for COTELLIC, as determined exclusively by Genentech, have been contrary to the applicable terms of the collaboration agreement. We have raised this concern with Genentech, along with other material concerns regarding Genentech’s performance under the collaboration agreement, but thus far have been unable to come to resolution on any of these issues. Accordingly, on May 3, 2016, we issued a formal notice of dispute to Genentech, per the collaboration agreement’s dispute resolution procedures. This notice asserts claims against Genentech related to its clinical development, pricing and commercialization of COTELLIC, and cost and revenue allocations arising from COTELLIC’s commercialization in the United States. If the dispute is not resolved within thirty days of Genentech’s receipt of this notice, we intend to initiate an arbitration."
"If Roche is correct in this analysis of the working relationship between MAPK dysfunction and PD-1i efficacy, they literally have the tiger by the tail.."
Look also at the Colet trial in triple negative breast cancer. I'm not familiar with outcomes in this indication or what Is currently being developed to treat it, but 8/16 responses sounds auspicious to me. I see the share price is settling back down to Earth. Looking to pick up some trading shares along here somewhere, perhaps in the 6.90's. Reaching 7.34 was not a one time event.
" My o my, it appears there is a lot of new juice to consider... "
Your on the right track. Now look at how many other cancer types in which MAPK dysregulation leads to loss of MHC1 expression. The slideshow you found, is it their standard company presentation or is it the ASCO 2016 specific one? I didn't think they were going to post last nites until after ASCO.
"I'm not opposed to it if they can get the right assets."
My investment premise here is not to see them become a holding company. You have much more faith in them than I do. Everything is finally falling into place and then this idea floats up.
Sorry, still works for me. Replace the dot with a . If it doesn't work maybe try a windows 10 computer.
"Running a monotherapy trial with all those specific criteria for enrollment would make sense. (Would the FDA allow it? Would an NCCN compendium entry suffice?)"
I've been calling for a RET NSCLC trial for a long time. The NCCN listing is great, but EXEL can't promote the drug for this indication, so it's available and some reimbursement is available, but you have to guess that market penetration is very low because of a lack of testing for the marker and no promotion by the company. It's an opportunity that might be lost if one of the other RET TKI sponsors spends the money to do a ph3.
"A more ambitious trial would involve Nivolumab + Cabo vs Nivolumab in wt-NSCLC. If according to Apolo triplet therapy is tolerable, they should be designing and deploying this trial now."
It wasn't much in the way of a thorough explanation, but the pick up I got was that the current strategy for NSCLC is to convince one of the IST's to do the trial for them. If CaboSun turns out to be fillable, then maybe its a viable strategy, but progress is glacial while the PD1 companies are in a land rush state of mind testing various combinations.