I know that this was your first and only venture into the stock market, and having watched your investment slide into the red, I understand that when it finally goes green, the natural reaction is to take your small profit and run. Even if you are cautious, I think, a better approach is always to sell half.
PS they have plenty of money in the coffers. If they have another secondary, it will not because they need cash, but because the venture capitalists are taking profits.
Personally, I think he is the alter ego of "john(fill in the blank)Kelly", who always claims to have been short whatever stock dropped that day. Between them, they're raking in those imaginary dollars.
John Orwin, the CEO, is periodically excoriated for his role in the debacle of AFFY, where he was also the CEO... unfairly, I think. Orwin became CEO of AFFY in February of 2011. From that point until November of 2012, the stock ran up from about 6.50 to almost 25. No complaints then. Their drug was an alternative to AMGEN's epogen/nupogen (sp?) regime and was expected to take a chunk out of that very lucrative franchise, initially in dialysis clinics. The drug had been approved by the FDA and was beginning to be used by most of the key dialysis providers . Then one of the providers announced, without explanation, that they were slowing the rollout of the AFFY drug. That should have been a clue. The stock dropped a couple of points. Then, without warning, they announced that the drug was being withdrawn from the market since it apparently sent a small proportion of patients (1 out of 1,000, I seem to recall) into fatal shock. The stock fell from about 20 to about 3 in one session. The drug had been cleared by the FDA and was on the market. None of the clinical trials had turned up this fatal reaction. Lots of astute investors owned the stock, including some of the major biotech funds. I owned a couple of thousand shares myself. (although, for some reason, I had sold the shares out of my wife's account a few days prior to the implosion). None of this could have been foreseen by Orwin, in my opinion.
Relypsa went public on Nov 15, 2013- about 8 million shares at $12 a share. It ran up quickly into the 40's. Then, along with all the other biotechs, it started to drop in late February of this year. A secondary offering was issued on April 12 - 4 million shares at $25 a share. This seems to have further depressed the stock. About 2/3 of the stock is still held by the venture funds. My own interpretation is that the public lost interest in the stock after the February selloff and the subsequent secondary, even though the trials have been impressive.
Interesting that you appear under this ID for the first time on Aug 6. When AAPL was 60, what name were you posting under? You seem to appear on various boards starting on August 6, always claiming to have been deeply invested in whatever stocks popped that day. For example, on Aug 11, you were bragging about your stake in CTRP, which has gone from 67.20 on that date to 64.17 now. FSLR was also one of your big winners on Aug 11, but seems to have fallen from 73.80 then to 68.68 now. YY was finishing a big run on Aug 11, and you claimed to have owned it. Now that it's dropped a few points, it seems to have vanished form your portfolio, just like these other stocks. On Aug 13, you were bragging about your prescience in owning JMEI, which had run up from 29 to 36 during the first couple of weeks in August. Now that it's fallen back to 30, it seems to have dematerialized as well. So, for the rest of your portfolio, I'd first ask, what name were you posting under when you bought TSLA,VIPS, PANW, NFLX, GILD, CELG, etc.? I've been a frequent visitor to the GILD board for a couple of years and can't recall ever seeing your posts. My second question would be why, with an incredible run of success like that, would you have changed your id? Unless, of course, you were just making it all up.
You are selling a stock which seems to me to have broken out and today made a new 52 week high. So, yes, I think you will have seller's remorse. In fact, many here seem to have been trading this stock for nickels and dimes and will now take their small change and go home. Baker Brothers is not in this for small change.
My post re a possible inversion candidate was for FLTX, a fleet management software company. As for AVNR, I don't think that they'll grow into a big pharma company -- that's almost impossible nowadays, when any company with a promising drug gets bought out. GILD and AMGN are anomalies in that they have now grown too large to buy out. The hope with AVNR is that their pipeline of drug candidates shows sufficient promise to grow the stock price and that eventually they attract a bid well above whatever that stock price might happen to be at the time.
Note that at the time this trade was reported, the stock did not budge. It's obviously impossible to trade more than 1/4 of the daily volume at one moment without moving the price. Therefore, you can be sure that this trade occurred outside of the regular market, in the so-called "dark pools". All of this would tend to indicate that someone is accumulating stock near its recent highs.
The fact that you've been hanging around this particular corner for four years and have, by your own reckoning, reaped "200% gains", whatever that means, does not make you king, in spite of your somewhat grandiose title. If one had bought this stock four years ago @ 2.84, you would have roughly doubled your money to this point. If you had bought GILD at that same point, you would have multiplied you money 7X; if you'd bought CELG, you'd be up 4X; if you'd bought MDVN, you'd be up 20X; and if you'd bought PCYC, you'd be up 16X. In fact, if you'd bought dumb old BMY in August 2010, your investment would have gone from 22 then to 50 today. In case you accuse me of cherrypicking, note that IBB, one of the more widely traded pharma ETF's, has quadrupled over the past 4 years. And, most obvious of all, if you'd just bought the S&P 500 in August of 2010, you'd have more than doubled your money to this point. So having a "strong buy" on a stock which, even at its recent highs, has gone essentially nowhere, strikes me as dogged, to say the least. Now, when the stock finally looks to be breaking out, you look in your crystal ball and see doom. Incidentally, when and if a secondary offering occurs, you can be sure that the underwriters will give the stock a good hard boost upwards beforehand.
Hi,mrobinso I'm a Robinson on my mother's side...all Scotch Irish blacksmiths. RLYP is a relatively new position for me. My approach is to stick a toe in the water, and, when the position becomes profitable, to add shares. I actually added some shares today because it seemed to be selling off on low volume. I added at 25.83 and 25.55; had an order in at 25.50 which didn't fill. I think the stock caught my attention when it showed up in the 13f (quarterly portfolio disclosure) of Orbimed Advisors, a medically oriented hedge fun which I frequently steal ideas from. In their recently released second quarter 13f, they are still holding almost 10 million shares, their tenth largest position. While the stock had sold off a lot from its highs, it seemed to show support at around 22.50. The technology is unusual: a substance which you ingest which then binds with potassium and is excreted. This enables those being treated for heart failure to continue on the conventional therapy longer without the potassium buildup which threatens the kidneys. The phase III trial results looked impressive to me. The effect of dosing with their drug, Patiromer, were very durable. I also note that 5AM Partners, a venture capital group with a remarkable record of success in the pharma arena, are among the major backers. I also like the fact that, as witnessed by this quiescent board, it seems to be flying under the radar. And yes, ITMN was one of my major holdings. (Note: It is also one of Orbimed's larger positions at #11, right behind RLYP.) Good luck to you.
PS: I have a memory of being vaccinated by the military with this kind of device in the 70's. It was an air gun that shot the vaccine into your arm without a needle. If the contact between the gun and the skin wasn't perfect, there might be some bleeding. And they didn't clean the gun between injections. The VA now apparently acknowledges this technique as a source of some HepC infections and finally directed the military to stop using it in about 1999.
The US military isn't that dumb. Those vaccinations were given by an air injection gun. There was no needle involved.
Well, I'm glad that we've attracted a new sceptic, rather than the solitary phosteric/berkley/analyst/green Dendreonite who crawls out of the woodwork everytime we rally. Meanwhile, another new high.
Congo is undoubtedly right about the need for a secondary offering, barring some unforeseen injection of capital. They simply have too many irons in the fire for the amount of cash in the bank. However, this didnot deter me from entering in the 5.80 area and adding cautiously since then. Who says that with the right kind of positive news, we can't have a secondary @ 8?
I understood that "double blind" studies meant that no one knew the results ahead of time. I think the PR department is justdoing what PR departments are supposed to do.