Where does "inbred" come from? The longer this stock stays stalled out, the angrier you seem to become.
If you did indeed take profits and sell half your position, I applaud your wisdom. However, for someone who has taken money off the table and moved on, your posts seems a tad emotional. ("wild rabid dog" ,etc.) And if, as you claim, "the 'tutes are buying up this stock like wild men", why isn't the price going up?
In other words, aside from one person masquerading as several different posters, this board is entirely populated by true believers. Why wouldn't they want to hear at least one dissenting voice? Incidentally, I'm not short this stock; I wouldn't short any pharma stock - it's too dangerous. For the same reason, I would not put a major chunk of my assets behind any one pharma stock. I've shorted stocks in the past, and was shorting the S&P via SDS in recent days. But if I had been short individual stocks, it would have been insane not to cover your position during the course of those recent plunges in the averages.
The IBB was up only .68% yesterday, while the XBI was up 2%, which tells us that the smaller biotechs did much better than the large ones. But I'm not talking about one day's performance. With its robust cashflow, I expected this to recover to 110 by now.
Stellarresults, after posting last Sunday, vanished. I think that he/she bailed on Monday's drop and is now revisiting us out of nostalgia.
A quick check with reality: Neither Linzess nor plectanadide are going to be "blockbusters". Because: (1) There are lots of laxatives - my CVS has a whole aisle of them. (2) While constipated people may feel like they're going to die, they're not; (3) Of the 45 million people who are constipated, a sizable proportion will find relief with prune juice; (4) Linzess, over a period of almost 3 years, has gradually eroded Amitiza's business to the point where they now have 60% of the market, and are still losing money; (5) The PBM's are not going to pay big money for a laxative. CVS bumped Amitiza off the formulary in favor of Linzess, not because it was less efficacious (which it is), but because it was cheaper. If you claim hardship, they will cheerfully render a coupon which will take your co-pay down to $30 a month. This is constipation, folks, not cancer. I own IRWD because I know that their sales are strong enough that if you tucked them into another marketing entity, they would immediately be accretive. I'm thinking $15 a share.
I used to frequent the DNDN board, trying to persuade the zealots that the company had serious problems. (I was suspect, of course, because I owned shares in MDVN.) Nevertheless, some of these folks had ridden the stock up from 3 to 80 (roughly) and thought it was their road to riches. All the way back down to 4, they raged against trapped shorts, hedge funds who were driving the price down to "steal" their shares, fantasized about imminent buyouts, etc.
The only point on which you and I agree is that deliberately trying to create confusion via counterfeit id's is despicable.
Today the IBB was up .68%. But the XBI, which is concentrated in smaller biotechs, was up 2%. In fact, of the 21 biotechs I own, 15 were up. Some rather dramatically. (CEMP +4%; EPRS +7.07%; INCY +5.34%; PFNX +4.26%: TTPH +8.59%) Even dumb old IRWD made a 2% gain. But SGYP, the magic stock which is about to be acquired for billions of dollars, could only eke out a gain of a lousy penny. You guys obviously know something to which the rest of the investing world is oblivious.
Okay, let's try this again: I maintain that a rational investor would have taken half off the table not at the alltime high of 10.15, but perhaps in the area of 9.60, where it lingered for several days. However, I didn't post on the SGYP board until July 30, spurred into action by SGYP longs gushing on the IRWD board about their superior trial results. I came to this board and ventured the opinion that the results were not that impressive. On that day SGP opened at 9.35, and, obviously driven down by my rebuttal, closed at 8.59. So let's take the midpoint between those two prices, 8.97, as our starting point. Since then, SGYP, the stock about to be deluged by multibillion dollar buyout offers, has declined in price by 1.65, or 18.4%. Ironwood, the doomed competitor, both opened and closed that day at 10.47. Since then, in the face of an almost 10% drop in the XBI, an ETF composed of mostly smaller pharmas, IRWD has advanced 7.6%.
Yes, I knew there was a better example!. And we all know how the common aversion to moldy cheese has doomed penicillin.
You're betraying your ignorance again. The idea that the words "e-coli" would frighten anyone away from Linzess - much less a physician - is absurd. E-coli can, in the proper concentration, make you sick. Botulinim toxin will make you much sicker. Yet it is the basis for Botox, a fairly successful product. Thalidomide was a dangerous drug for expectant mothers, but Celgene bought the rights to it and built a 98 Billion dollar company. Curare - the stuff Amazonian Indians use for poison darts - has given rise to successful muscle relaxants and snake venom to anti-coagulants, etc. etc.
SP: "whose", not "who's".
Incidentally, since July 30, my first appearance here amidst the euphoria over your trial results, SGYP is down 23% while IRWD, the company which would theoretically be most impacted by the SGYP drug, is up over 7%.
As a public service to the naïve. By the way, while I'm not short SGYP and was, for a brief time, mildly long, I do have a long position in IRWD.
I've been posting on Yahoo! boards for at least 20 years ... always with the same ID.
I expected this to snap back much more dramatically from the market selloff. It looks weak to me here and I wonder if their HIV franchise is the reason behind it. I note that last week, Triumeq had moved up to the point where it now has half as many scripts as Stribild. Checking patient reviews, it seems that Triumeq may be a more effective drug. If the reviewers are to be believed, it drops viral load and raises T-cell counts much more quickly than Stribild. It also seems to have minimal side effects. In any event, it is growing quickly ... at Stribild's expense. Patients also describe the help they're getting with their co-pays on Triumeq as generous.
"If I didn't sell at $10 I'm sure not selling at $7" may get you points for bravado, but is symptomatic of the folly afoot here. It's not a war of willpower between longs and shorts. When the stock moves down from 10 to 7, the market is telling you something.
This marvelous development is the result of the coverage on the Yahoo! analyst board shrinking. Until this month, there were 5 analysts listed, with 2 rating it a "strong buy" an 3 rating it a"buy". Now 2 of the latter seem to have disappeared, which leaves the enthusiasts in a majority position.
Hmm. Linzess is continuing to erode Amitiza's position. Over three years, Linzess has steadily grown to a 60% share of the CIC market, entirely at Amitiza's expense. So perhaps they feel that their partner is not managing the situation properly and that they can do better.
Well, when the market opened down 1,000 points - and every stock in my portfolio down with it - the one stock I knew didn't deserve to be down was this one. I bid 1,000 shares at the market, and got them at 18 something. Then another 1,000 in the 20's and another at 22. I also got some FB near its low. In the old days when the floor specialists were still around, this nonsense never would have happened because they would have sopped up those panic shares ... at least in stocks like this. As I've opined before, you have to know why you're holding this stock. I use it as a source of income and a stabilizing component in an IRA portfolio which, by conventional standards, ismuch too speculative.