Yes, the canny Baker Brothers own a bit of almost everything biotech. As of their most recent 13f, IDRA constituted .15% of their portfolio. PCYC constituted 17.7% of their portfolio. According to my calculations, this means they have bet about $12 million on IDRA and $1.06 billion on PCYC. Note: In the past, they have also bet on some notable losers, such as ARIA, VVUS, etc. As of their 13f, they only had a tiny (for them) position in PBYI, which has doubled since then. On balance, obviously, they pick more winners than losers. And it's always worthwhile to see what they're holding.
The positive news isn't really news. We're all still waiting for the major FDA approvals. The impatient are being shaken out here. Paradoxically, when a large entity wants to establish a position, they will often begin by driving the price down. You can see that with GILD today. Even the mighty CELG, by the way, after being up 2.50 is now down 1.63. But don't tell me that the managers who are underweight CELG and GILD won't want to be showing them in their portfolios by year end. Besides, for a retail investor, who wants to sell these stocks in the last few weeks of the year and pay all those taxes?
In spite of a major raise in price target to $110 by Credit Suisse. GILD, of course, was supposed to have a major competitor to ibrutinib in idelalasib, and I believe their ASH presentation was today. Nevertheless, a great company. Couldn't resist adding some here at 70.50. Looks like they're going to a bitrge PCYC @120 for a while. Precisely what happened with SNTS: locked at 23.75 until the buyout by Salix @ 32 was announced. A little cynicism is called for in this market.
Do you mean that someone actually pays attention to SA? Down 1.80 this morning on 60,000 shares. Not exactly a mass exodus. In fact, probably just hopeful retail shorts. We seem to be attracting them here.
Well, we seem to be opening with dips on weak volume, then moving upward. Volume Friday was 1/3 of Thursday's. Today was half of Friday's. I'd say the stock continues to be under accumulation.
Thanks for your posts, jgm. Amidst all the blather, it's good to be reminded of just how powerful this story is.
Oh-oh. Holy, when we last talked you were rethinking your short and talking about buying the dips.
The trial for idealalisib, the much ballyhooed GILD CLL drug uses it in combo with Rituxan. I think there are persuasive arguments for using ibrutinib in place of Rituxan. And saving Rituxan for the cases which progress on ibrutinib.
I've forgotten the details of their agreement. Is PFE committed to sharing development costs?
Since they have trials in progress for neratanib in several indications, there's always the possibility that they may float a secondary at some point. If you are waiting for 48, you should buy a 50 put. It will probably cost you very little.
Herceptin isn't chemo. And yes, I've done quite a bit of shortselling. In general, I'd say it's a mistake to focus on shorting in a rising market - as the feeble returns of the long/short hedge funds this year demonstrate. For a trader to hold short positions overnight is perilous. I would advocate always having stops on the upside. The worst thing you can do, in my experience, is to chase a bad short up. If you are going to build a short position, you build it on the way down.
People are being put on Rituxan now. Not exactly cheap. ($8,000 or so per month, if I recall correctly) In their trial, the Gilead drug idealalisib, which is being touted as an alternative to ibruinib, was being used in combination with Rituxan. Since Gilead isn't exactly modest in their pricing, that little combo would cost you a pretty penny - beside which the monothereapy with ibrutinib would seem like a bargain. Besides, Rituxan has to be administered intravenously and adverse reactions to the infusion are common.
As over the past two sessions, we should see a dip at the open, which will attract shortsellers who will then be punished.
A "staged entry" to a short position without stops is questionable when the first stage is almost 7 points underwater. Your knowledgeable source has misinformed you about the side effects. The drug was already controlled by Puma when the key trial was completed. The adverse events, etc. in the trial were fewer than those exhibited by Herceptin. Sometimes it pays to actually look stuff up.
That's it in nutshell. These folks who are talking about "fundamentals" have no idea of the real opportunity here - it's just their way of saying that the stock has gone up too fast.
Apologies for my garbled heading, which results from eliminating a reference to the publication in question, assuming that it would get me dumped into the SPAM file.
Note that the lead story on the Summary page stirs expectations for idelalasib by hinting that Gilead is "set to reveal further details" of the recently halted trial in Tuesday's ASH presentation. (Unlikely in my view - the numbers are the numbers.) It also dramatizes the results by noting that the trial was halted because "the drug was proving so effective" and raises the possibility of idelalasib being serous competition for ibrutinib. I suspect that this story may be attracting shortsellers to PCYC. Or at least scaring away some longs.
In truth, the idelalasib trial compared the results of the drug + Rituxan vs a placebo +Rituxan, and was halted because the combo therapy was more effective. The significant PCYC trials use ibrutinib as a monotherapy. In my view ibrutinib is poised to replace Rituxan as a first line treatment for CLL. I don't think we'll get much of a pop from the Monday presentations. In fact, we may get another selloff from disappointed trader whereupon I would look to add more shares.