Four days after tender? Very fast! Let's see how long it takes for the non-tendered shares to be liquidated.
While you wait for the RCPT money to go into your account, you can participate in the other biopharmas by selling naked puts. If you get assigned, you will have bought the stock at the strike price minus the premium. But you wanted to get into the stock anyway. To do this, you much have a fairly high trading level authority. If you are afraid that the target biopharma will rise too quickly, buy calls.
The CELG tender offer is the only thing that will go right today in the market. Everything else is up in the air. S&P Futures are down 82 handles!
Look at the price action. RCPT is selling very close to $232. The market knows that certain funds have tendered and the deal is done. If the tender was at risk, the market would know also and price accordingly (lower).
Today is the last day to tender. Don't you think that if a white knight were to do something, it would have happened already?
I suspect CELG will buy the tendered shares ASAP before they are withdrawn. Once 51% are in CELG's hands, no other better bid can be acted upon. An investor in RCPT wants to be in this tender as it means an early sell and receipt of money. That money would be very useful right now to take advantage of this market swoon.
A holder of call options like yourself is hoping for something to happen before the option expires. Only two events can cause your options to rise. First is another higher offer. Second is a failed Tender which we will know about on Tuesday August 25th. If neither of these events happen, your December $240 call option becomes worthless. You can sell these options to recover something. Right now they are selling for $0.30....but if you sell, you will not participate in the two upside events if they happen.
The odds-on bet is that the Tender will be sufficiently subscribed and the merger will take place. If your options become worthless, treat them like any other expired worthless option. Because the merger will transpire much earlier than December, the December options will accelerate to an earlier date. To you it's moot since worthless is worthless no matter when the options expire.
The writers of options have a different kettle of fish to eat. So long as the options they wrote are still alive, they must theoretically be prepared to act if they are assigned. To support this position the option writer must have cash or margin in his account. This cash or margin is tied up and can not be used for another position until the short RCPT options expire or deemed dead. As this may take some time before the merger takes hold, it behooves the short option writer to buy back the position. Grant you this will be at a very low price. There may be a time when RCPT options no longer trade but the options are still alive.
I was short Sept $230 puts and received $4.70 ps. This is the maximum I was ever going to get from this trade. Last Thursday, I bought them back for $0.40 each. This allowed me to sell a PCLN put expiring the next day 8/14 which recovered more than $0.40 for RCPT. Had I not done this, I would have had to wait many weeks until September option expiring date.
ICPT’s management went at length during the cc to discuss the DiaNippon P2 study. This study is similar to FLINT but limited to Japan only. What could happen? On the bad side, the 45 mg dose could make for some itchy Japanese. On the good side, Japanese have low incidence of CV issues.
I think what the market is being prepped for is early termination of the Japanese study similar to FLINT. As I expect positive results, DaiNippon will then put its support behind ICPT’s P3 study, REGENERATE. This study has not starting enrolling yet and an early DiaNippon announcement would be good timing for all.
ISIS is trading below it's 60 and 200 DMA. Well below. Any support is much lower.
This is like driving around with no seat belt or insurance card. ISIS can be whacked at any time.
The shyster lawyers will extract their pound of flesh and then move on to something else. On the one hand, AAVL did a bad job of communicating the endpoints of the P2 study. But on the other hand, any reasonable investor will know that #$%$ efficacy data from P2 will not be good for the stock. The shysters will badger AAVL until one side gives up. Not much of a case here.
However, AAVL will burn it's last dollar to try and achieve something positive. Cash value is nearly meaningless.
“…will understand that the failing was to include NAS 3 patients in the study, which distorted the results”
Excuse me but weren’t there NAS 3 patients in both study arms?
In Genfit’s own words, they failed to meet the primary study endpoints. Am I distorting this? Did I misinterpret this? How am I playing fast-and-loose with this announcement?
Who won the Superbowl in February? Was it Seattle or New England? Does Seatlle argue that they won if the game eliminated that play at the end where Wilson tossed the ICPT (lol). Do they say the intercepting linebacker was out of position and could never really jump in front of the receiver? Shoulda woulda coulda. No sports fan in America would pay any heed to this revisionist argument.
My posts contain a mixture of facts and opinion; E.g:
Fact: Elafibranor failed its P2 trial. You too know this as factual.
Opinion: The FDA will not approve a P3 study for Elafibranor. Can you not discern that this is my opinion? Did I represent this as fact? It is a highly subjective assertion. You need to learn to read carefully.
The FDA will do what is right given the facts. If you were the FDA would you approve P3 for a company that failed P2? How would you react to Genfit’s arguments based on a slice and dice approach? Is this scientific? To me, Genfit is making an omelet out of broken eggs.
The entire world relies on the US FDA in its approval of drugs and devices. The EU approves drugs and devices for the Europe. But they rely on the FDA for the heavy lifting. The FDA’s batting average has been pristine and they want to keep it that way.
Did you read any trash in my posting? All are factual or my opinions.
Here is an example of trash: DUDE, that OCA drug will kill you; its a POS heart attack pill. WANNA DIE? Take OCA.
Elafibranor (nee GFT 505) must show reduction in fibrosis to be competitive with OCA. It has not and will not in any future clinical trial show this effect. Did you see any such effect in the 272 patient GOLDEN study? NASH is a one way ticket to liver failure. Only OCA can reverse disease progression.
Publication in a Journal? What will this do? The article may fuel the jollies of academics. But it's investors that drive stock price.
The FDA is known to be difficult. They caused MNKD to spend another $200 mln for additional P3 studies because the delivery device was changed. And this was after they told MNKD that such change would not affect the NDA. I expect the FDA to pound Genfit for they have proven nothing in P2b to go onto P3. Investors who think otherwise are delusional. The FDA has hitched its NASH wagon to OCA and does not need Elafibranor to treat the disease.
AAVL's SEC filing indicated that with a positive P2a outcome for AVA-101, they would file and IND. No doubt due to the devastating prognosis of WAMD. P2a was only 32 patients and efficacy was a secondary endpoint. It seems that statistical powering is impossible for such a small sample size. This is the reasoning behind the secondary endpoint label. But how then can the FDA approve an IND? Makes no sense.
However there was enough efficacy data to show the ambiguous efficacy of AVA-101.
I think the lawyers will make money on this; no so the investors.
Wake up and smell the coffee! Those wuss Franco-phonies knew GFT 505 was not so powerful. So it set up a P3 protocol they could pass easily. It blew up in their face when the placebo group did better. They then sliced and diced the data to find some subset that looked good. ICPT did the opposite: their protocol was intentionally tough as they knew OCA could do the job. The positive data was so overwhelmingly good that they terminated the study early because the statistics said no mas.
GFT 505 did nothing on the progression of fibrosis. OCA reversed the progression. This alone should tell you something is different. There is no doc in the world that would use GFT 505 as it will lead to liver failure.
The FDA was created to counter the 'medicine man' who made outlandish claims to sell his product. Even today, the FDA is focused on claims and labels. The FDA will not issue their mandate to sell based on hearsay. The drug company must provide data from a powered clinical study to show that their drug works. Everything else is BS. GFT 505 failed its P2 study. One cannot throw out data to show that GFT 505 works. It's as simple as that. To sell any drug of merit in this world, companies must go through the US FDA.
GFT 505 is a safe drug. But it is not as efficacious as an even safer molecule: sugar.
Yesterday's downgrade of ICPT by MS had the impact of a drive-by shooting. There was not much substance to MS's new rating but investors sold first and evaluated later. The general market sentiment was not great so we had a sell off. But it was small in the scheme of things. I expect other analysts to "reiterate" their numbers and the squabble will tone down to a quiet roar until the next catalyst.
Speaking of quiet. Has anyone heard from Genfit recently? No, I'm not talking about our resident franco-thorn-in-the-side abalest1. They have been scrounging around for funds to conduct a P3 study on GFT 505 on NASH. We all know that GFT 505 failed to beat the placebo in P2 so why go on? I thought only Germans were stubborn. The FDA will hold Genfit to the same standard as it does Intercept: 2,400 patient study for P3. This will cost both parties eight figures. Who in his right mind would invest this type of money for a drug that failed P2? At the very least, the FDA will force Genfit to re-do P2. Genfit will not do this as it will set them back another 2-3 years. In summary, I envision Genfit announcing a withdrawal from NASH to focus on other disease states. This announcement will be a powerful catalyst for ICPT. It may also induce large pharmas to kick into partnership mode.
Berens is a physician turned analyst. He went from a small stage (FBR) to a large one (MS). He has clinical experience and substantial business education. Not a lightweight.
Investors sell for they think he knows something more than they do. The fullness of time will allow the other analysts to weigh in on his opinion.