Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

PDI, Inc. Message Board

betasplen1 752 posts  |  Last Activity: Apr 17, 2015 6:04 PM Member since: Mar 2, 2004
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • I was hoping Seth was shown the door (stock would have opened above $3 tomorrow) but nah....

  • Reply to

    Bantering with trolls

    by betasplen1 Apr 17, 2015 12:14 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 17, 2015 3:59 PM Flag

    Before the other longs ask if you are on meds to borrow more to buyback shares and that it should be reserved for companies swimming in cash, profits and sky high valuations, let me say that it all depends on whether management is confident that Q and S will continue growing revenues and if they will break even later this year, at least on a FCF basis. If they are confident and want to show it to the street (shareholders and shorts), then borrowing at 4 or 5% to get a 200-300% return in a year is uhm... prudent. But if they think the shorts would continue to own them no matter what they do and have no faith in their plans, then they should keep trying less riskier moves that may or may not work in appreciating the stock price. My premise is simple - If we wait to turn a profit before buying back shares, we could be starting the reversal from the $1s instead of from here The shorts have such a grip here that fundamentals have not mattered for the past 12 months and may not matter for the near future either...

  • betasplen1 by betasplen1 Apr 17, 2015 3:13 PM Flag

    From the board discussion over the past week, this is what I could gather about what will be reported for 1Q15:

    Avanafil product revenue: $12MM
    Milestone payment for 15-min onset in EU from Menarini: $11.5MM
    Royalties: $2MM (??)
    Qsymia (assuming flat again): $13M
    Total: $38.5MM

    And there was talk about a $15M milestone payment in the RBC conference in Feb 2015. Is that a combination of some of the above or separate? If separate, we are talking about $53.5MM revenue?? Either way, it is a considerable beat of the analyst consensus of $21.8MM. Are the analyst models so messed up? They have just $87.6MM for the whole year ($141.3MM in 2016) and we are talking about half of it in the first quarter alone!!

  • betasplen1 by betasplen1 Apr 17, 2015 12:14 PM Flag

    will be coming to an end from my side. I know it will be tough with ruprechtroll since he is such a card. Time to start catching up the real and extensive DD put out by mike, mooky, vinny, chris, rpt1 and the other long timers. The short theory is simple - it will keep dropping since it has been dropping for the past 2 years. Too shallow to analyze after a while. The long theory that it will finally reverse goes much deeper - they are facts-based regarding:
    1)Their product efficacy
    2)Their ongoing trial results that may avert the need for/reduce requirement for CVOT
    3) The continuing sales growth
    4) The company fundamentals
    5) The relative valuation w.r.t peers
    6) The continuing institutional support
    7) The indirect respect from big pharma by wanting to copy one of their products lately
    8) The ongoing expense reductions
    9) The buyout possibilities
    10) The tantalizing prospect of a short squeeze on a positive catalyst
    11) The future share buyback possibility

    Gives me a lot of gray matter material to chew on. BTW, I need to send a 3rd email today to management. Other longs who share the same views as me on the need for a share buyback, please bombard management till they respond one way or another. Later....

  • I probably won't wait for $30.

  • Reply to

    The usual suspects are not shorts

    by betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 5:00 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 5:55 PM Flag

    Thanks for that insight Mooky. I like the "competitor hatred" theory more than the "paid basher" theory. But I would think they got what they wanted by now with VVUS decimated to 25% of ARNA's market cap, even with higher revenues than ARNA. Why still spew venom with "forked tongues" upon a seemingly dead horse? But the more I understand the bashers here, the calmer I am getting. I will probably stop engaging with them as time goes since I have more important things to do over here. My numero uno priority right now is to get Seth to agree on the share buyback initiative. That is the ONLY way to exterminate the vermins (other than a bidding war between Teva and Actavis)...

  • Reply to

    The usual suspects are not shorts

    by betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 5:00 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 4:17 PM Flag

    To be truly joyful, you should learn to stop hating. They are mutually exclusive. May I know your purport of consternation?

  • betasplen1 by betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 3:56 PM Flag

    Hi my feathered friend, how could I forget you? Sorry to belabor this point but I am on a mission to find a few good shorts here. Are you a short or a troll? I know emus are not short though they could look like a troll when compared to a peacock. I hope it is a simple question and I get a simple answer. So far, I have looked and found none. If you are short, please state your position as well. Nothing to be bashful about with the stock where it is... Thanks for your co-operation.

  • betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 2:52 PM Flag

    Definitely not unknown because I own a bunch of it. But the jury is still out on the "gem" part. But thanks for the free advertisement anyway..

  • Reply to

    Interesting read

    by betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 2:10 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 2:36 PM Flag

    2 words. Bidding war! The original pmt has got to hear this.He might cut short his expedition in the South Pole. After all, he was the grandfather of the "VVUS will be bought out" theory.

  • betasplen1 by betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 2:10 PM Flag

    Google the following: "Vivus: Teva Wants To Make Generic Qsymia - Can This Be Good?"
    SA Article was written on Mar 11, 2015. See the point where neither wanted to partner but now want to make generics of Q? I need to share my genius title with this author :(...

    Here's an excerpt:
    --------------------------------------------
    So where are we now? We have two companies competing to have the right to make generic Qsymia. Vivus received a 30-month stay when it sued Actavis, and will get a similar stay when it files a suit against Teva. That being said, how expensive is it to fight on two fronts? Perhaps an opportunity has now presented itself where Vivus could turn one of these players into a suitor. In fact, it may be that Actavis and Teva went after generic Qsymia simply to get Vivus to the table. These companies could be interested in Qsymia at a very high level, or perhaps the interest is in the erectile dysfunction drug. Either way, the silver lining is having more than one party interested in the drug. Why neither stepped up to the plate to simply partner the drug would make for interesting conversation.

    So what is the investment strategy here? That is an interesting discussion as well. Vivus has over $300 million in cash but carries a market cap of less than its cash. Essentially, Vivus is cheap right now. The main reason it is cheap is that sales of both of its drugs are not setting any records. If a big pharma player like Teva or Actavis were to step up to buy Vivus, investors would see some form of premium. Vivus may be worth a look for this reason alone......

  • Reply to

    The usual suspects are not shorts

    by betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 5:00 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 11:06 AM Flag

    Chris, so you are saying that buttocks boy is lying? Can't be....

  • Reply to

    The usual suspects are not shorts

    by betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 5:00 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 11:04 AM Flag

    And "they" are making money hand over fist for the past 2 years but that's not the point Rup. From your logic, the institutions holding 70+MM shares of VVUS rarely make money. I don't have to tell you all the big names holding long - it is plain for everyone to see. Not so for the short side - they are shrouded in mystery. I conclude from this exercise that there are no shorts on this message board. Just trolls. Doesn't affect me but the passionate longs like Bubble and Miami may be interested in this revelation. BTW Rup, you are a classic, grotesque troll. Sorry, calling a spade a spade... See Wiki definition below:
    ---------------------------
    In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion

  • Reply to

    The usual suspects are not shorts

    by betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 5:00 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 16, 2015 9:32 AM Flag

    Seriously, who are the shorts on this message board (who have an active short position) that are part of the 35MM share army? Please reveal yourself. Also, what is your cost basis? I am long at $3.25. Thanks for your co-operation...

  • betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 8:01 PM Flag

    Obviously the patents are valid and have not expired. So, TEVA has 2 choices. Make a bid for Qsymia (or VVUS) or wait another 2.5 years. I see them offering up to $300MM for Q (TEVA has over $2B in cash) and VVUS accepting the offer, paying off its debt, immediately going FCF positive with Stendra and announcing a huge share buyback and the stock shoots up to $15 on a monster short squeeze. And then I wake up from my wet dream...

  • betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 7:35 PM Flag

    That equates to 150% annualized gains if you bought at yesterday's close and sold at today's close. Do not scoff my Michael Crichton wanna be...

  • Shenzi is just a hater from ARNA.
    Rup has no position and is here to improve his writing skills.
    The #$%$ boy cannot be taken seriously or he needs some serious lubricants in the future.

    So, who is actually in this "special" category?

  • Reply to

    INTERESTING STENDRA NEWS

    by r1t2003 Apr 15, 2015 2:16 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 4:20 PM Flag

    Thanks for that r1t. I now remember seeing that before but forgot. OK, so the agreement it is not as dire as I thought from your last post to me and Shenzi's reprisal of a flat 7% royalties. Then S revenues can perhaps continue at a 60% clip QoQ for 2015 and exceed $100MM...

  • Reply to

    INTERESTING STENDRA NEWS

    by r1t2003 Apr 15, 2015 2:16 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 4:09 PM Flag

    You know shorting is on margin, don't you? You mean to say you are not short VVUS? If so, congrats on that wise decision. Else, good luck in the future...

  • Reply to

    INTERESTING STENDRA NEWS

    by r1t2003 Apr 15, 2015 2:16 PM
    betasplen1 betasplen1 Apr 15, 2015 3:58 PM Flag

    It will be painful alright...for Shenzi probably, as he sees his profits disappear and have his brokerage call in his shares...

PDII
1.321-0.029(-2.15%)Apr 17 3:56 PMEDT