He could have advised Genentech/Tercica not to pursue that lengthy and expensive lawsuit against INSM, since iPlex is such a worthless drug anyway. What were they thinking? Why in the heck did the settlement name so many "approved" and "non-approved" indications for iPlex? How could there be any conceivable use for a compound that is merely at the very heart of biological regulation of cell division and growth? The CEOs and lawyers obviously do not have the level and depth of understanding of this surfer dude.
I just want to personally extend my congratulations to terry for resisting the urge to post here under whatever ID for what seems an eternity. How refreshing! Maybe you can make it a habit. You are on the road to a new life. Keep it up. We are behind you!
There's a reason the instys are piling in. They know the inevitable. I just want to see Capital Research (American Funds) come on board.
He assumes he has only a few adversaries using the same tactics he does. I think he would be shocked to find out how many real individuals see him for what he is: a vindictive, paranoid megalomaniac.
You don't make any money because you don't have any and you're a sicko whose entire life is harassing INSM longs on this message board with your entourage of ridiculous alternate IDs.
You idiot! All I did was point out that someone paid a $3 ASK on a 15 Feb INSM call, meaning they bet big the SP would surpass $18 and their call would be in the money. Well, they lost the bet and it surely wasn't me. But keep posting your tripe and keep trying to score points in your little brain.
What child is this? One that speaks like a child, thinks like a child, and reasons like a child. And a naughty one at that.
Let's see....NBI ended 2014 at 3184. After 5 days, it closed at 3260 yesterday. That means an up year for biotech. INSM ended 2014 at 15.28. After 5 days, it closed at 15.94. That means an up year for INSM. Thanks for this info.
I totalled up the shares they owned at the end of the 3rd quarter, and it came to 1,388,289. So they upped their stake by 2,106,218 shares for a total of 3,494,507.
It's the whole point of binding rhIGF-1 to the protein rhIGFBP-3 and what makes iPlex, iPlex. Controlled release of rhIGF-1.
Check out this study: Recombinant human insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (rhIGFBP-3): effects on the glycemic and growth promoting activities of rhIGF-1 in the rat.
The investigators concluded: The hypoglycemic activity of IGF-1 was greatly reduced if IGF-1 was administered bound to 293-cell rhIGFBP-3 but anabolic activity was unchanged or enhanced.
I don't know what it means, but just draw a channel and buy at the low end and sell at the high end to reduce your basis in core shares. I've started doing this again in a Roth IRA account after last August's swoon. Seems to be working.
You might want to delete your post "Not sure why this was deleted." It seems to have become the site of a desultory philippic and you have the power to enjoy flushing it down the john.
How does he decide who he will clone? You don't seem to rate cloning. Maybe because you're not an iPlex pumper.
The Nasdaq institutional ownership has not yet been updated to reflect all positions as of year end. I assume those numbers will appear on 2/17, the first business day after the middle of the month. This data will reveal the institutional bet on this company's prospects with pretty much the same lowdown as everyone in the public has access to right now..