ALT flares don't mean much. if you look at prior studies ALT flares happen under a variety of scenarios that have nothing to do with curing the disease. go on PubMed and read a few of them. plenty of interferon studies with ALT flares where no one was cured
need to eventually raise $ from ibanks. if it was just science they were touting they'd not do that in NYC. its about the coverage and fund raising eventually requied to fund all the studies like Monarch.
hope its not like sarepta. just looking at that one makes you appreciate bio-craziness. 30 years before they got a drug close to approval. 2012 the stock went from 15 to 2.70 till a small trial showed efficacy and the stock went to $3.45 to $8 then when data released it popped from $15 to $45 as analysts bet on Fast track.
then the FDA denied Fast Track and asked for larger study.. 2 years later the stock back at $12 and now $35
can't imagine how much grey hair that one gave people. it wasn't shorts, it was the FDA
the shorts are having a field day. ideal situation for them. biotech correction, thin volume to push around, and historically high margin leverage across the market forcing selling each time they can push it a bit.
6 seemed to be the floor, but at this point $5, then $4.
if you're a fund manager and your levered positions are under pressure are you going to lay out more in some spec biotech? prob not till the data is out and known.
I lightened up on my position after it broke 6.0 wait to see data and then determine whethe rto throw in towel or ride it through market correction. hopefully they have something concrete this time.
this is my hope. that it can replace IFN to some degree. then you don't need FC at all and the whole analysis changes to something more achievable short term.
interesting comments. confirms to me the mgmt. team is green and has miscalculated a number of things in terms of releasing info to investors, particularly the CEO with his analyst interactions and cnbc bluster. "miracle drug for hepatitis B"
Do you get the sense that there is realization on this team that they need to build a better board and mgmt. team with more experience bringing drugs from R&D to approval in a public company setting?
I could care less whether you or anyone else thinks of my position. Saying this is the next Gilead of any micro cap is just comical and typical retail fantasy. lets have some rational investment analysis here. too much pie in the sky bs
CA said on last conf call the FDA will require full results of the 1mg multi dose study before going to next dose. And that study has not even started yet. so I think you are wrong in that assessment. they are substantially delayed at this point , at least from the 2014 outlook they gave.
right, good question. whats it worth if the data is just 'interesting' and 'encouraging'... that isn't a bad thing, it just means the date of 'proof of efficacy' is further away.
Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of fast money in all the biotechs these days and they buy in prior to a catalyst date, then sell off either on or after.
if the data is 'average' I'm thinking that means fast money bails till the next 'catalyst data date' which is going to be late 2016 for monarch data.
we know the cash position is strong, but not strong enough to go that long, so that brings in some sort of financing, either partnership or secondary or private placement.
but how do we value a promising research drug that is 2-3 years out from approval at best. I see some other R&D stage bio techs with multiple drugs ..if you take their pipeline / market cap the drug candidates are valued between $150mill - $300mill typically. That would put ARWR at $300-600mill today, with expansion of pipeline in the works. which would indicate that $4 is sort of the low end, and $10.50 the high end... just pure back of envelope bsing.
they had an AD at AASLD last fall after some disappointing data .. just saying.
I don't think its safe to assume they have found a cure or FC in chimps. I think that is a dangerous assumption. Any investor here should be prepared for the possibility they just have 'interesting data' and that's it. This company has had several analyst days that were unremarkable.
only if they get approval to start 3-4mg multi-dose studies , even then, unless someone like Gilead announces a partnership its hard to see 200%
why do you care? these type of posts are really the worst on here... not even about the investment, but about someone you will never meet. lame.
Henry is probably (as I am) growing weary of the constant polyanna happy talk on this board as the investment value keeps dropping and data timeframes are extending.
If reading constant posts about how this will be a $100 billion company makes you feel secure, great.
If Henry wants more clarification and is concerned, whats wrong with that?
sussing out the timelines of all these studies, what the cash burn required is, what constitutes positive data etc is fairly complex ... whats wrong with people testing the assumptions here? certainly the happy talk hasnt' helped the stock price any!