Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 12:45 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 3 hrs 15 mins

Recent

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

Threshold Pharmaceuticals Inc. Message Board

dawginlife 100 posts  |  Last Activity: Oct 9, 2014 3:11 PM Member since: Oct 14, 2003
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Bad News for EXEL.....

    by semanresu Oct 9, 2014 12:50 PM
    dawginlife dawginlife Oct 9, 2014 3:11 PM Flag

    wow, looks like EBC-46 is the holy grail of cancer treatment. checkmate, all the existing cancer drugs are doomed. i can see it now, the FDA is going to approve it this year without any clinical trail b/c it's just that amazing. great opportunity to short the whole sector since this will put the squeeze on all companies with existing cancer treatments. you're the man seman!

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 9, 2014 3:01 PM Flag

    urabt, don't hold your breath, exel's management is not as dumb as you to give a way the cow when it's so close to giving milk. you should go back to index investing where you belong. biotech investing is no place for cowards.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 11:09 PM Flag

    answer me this, how do you think the company has been able to survive all this years without any revenue? how do you think they were able to raise money to fund their research all this past years b/f they even had an approved drug? since the company has been living from paycheck to paycheck, haven't they been living from one liquidity crisis to another based on your narrow views. so, now that they have an approved drug and another that's going to be approved, you suddenly think that they won't be able to raise any funds to continue their operations?

    truth is, you're a coward who bought into mCRCP being a slam dunk. now that you've been slapped in the face by reality, you're afraid to sit through another binary event so you're running around like a chicken with it's head cut off screaming "why isn't the company doing anything to raise the short term price of the stock so I can get out at a higher prices" b/c you don't have the balls to wait for the METEOR results.

    the truth hurts huh?

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 10:45 PM Flag

    bla bla bla, why don't you go crawl into a corner to cry about your losses. boo hoo hoo, why isn't the company liquidating their assets so i can recover some of my huge loss.. you're the type of investors that always finds himself holding the short end of the stick and wonders why. chump.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 8:59 PM Flag

    didn't i tell you already that your failure stems from you thinking you can value a biotech based on fundamental analysis? so, go ahead and stick you head in the financial reports but don't be surprised when the company does not behave like you think it should based on your reading of the financials. and it doesn't take a person with a degree in accounting to realize that a company with debt needs to raise money. it also doesn't take an accountant to tell you that there's nothing in the financials that's going to tell you how a company will meet it's obligations... but don't worry... this is where experience comes in... and it seems like you have none what so ever when it comes to investing in these sort of company. poor little ura is up the creek without a paddle. go stick your head back in those financials and continue to sing you gloom and doom song.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 8:51 PM Flag

    isn't your suggestions to break from the current strategy to go it alone on cabo? isn't your suggestions to monetize on our assets either by selling or partnering it now, even when it will most likely be at distressed terms? aren't those your wonderful ideas? aren't you telling the company to give up on their go it alone strategy; isn't that the same as asking the company to fold? i.e. don't play you current hand anymore and let's do something else even if that comes at a higher future cost.

    You seem to be averse to risk which is moronic that you would be investing in this sector where most drugs end in failure and company in liquidation. unlike you, i'm ready to loss most if not all of my investments if it turns out that i'm wrong with the GAMBLE. So, no, even if METEOR flops, i won't be in the same place as you b/c once i loss faith in a company, i sell (taking my losses) and move on, not stick around and cry over spilled milk like some little baby. that's how big boys play this game... if you can't deal with the consequences then you shouldn't be investing in this space.

    So, if you think MM can't turn around this ship, you should sell or even better yet, you should short... instead of crying for change that will never happen on a useless message board.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 8:38 PM Flag

    it's amusing how you try to twist my post about how i think you're an idiot for thinking ir would read your comments on a message board and actually take your rants seriously enough to bring them to the CEO's attention to something totally unrelated and unsaid by me. when in my initial post did i say the opinions of institutions did not matter? when did i say the institutions who were long the stock b/f the comet-1 meltdown would not be mad? but since you're obviously trying to change the topic away from my original comment b/c you probably realize the stupidity of what you said, i'll humor you and explain why institutions now may not give MM the boot like you think they should.

    the big fish, don't need to rant on a message board... if they have an opinion, they will get a face to face with management and the board to voice their concerns. So, if they were unhappy with the direction of the company, they would have brought it to MM's attention long ago and his seat would have been hot for awhile. So, why is he still at his job 1 month after the comet-1 failure and 7 months after after the interim blow up when most longs should have realized mCRPC success was not a slam dunk and could really fail? time is ticking and MM is still the CEO, hmm...

    Could it be that the institutions were on board with the gamble and knew the risk of success was low? such that when comet-1 failed, it did not come as a total shock to them like it did for some of the retail longs? Could it be that those who were shocked at interim failure had already sold out b/f the final analysis to retail? or perhaps there's already a changing of guards between institution holdings at this low prices such that the new institutions are more risk tolerant and are fine with MM's go it alone approach?

    when big boys get angry heads roll... but MM's head is still attached. maybe they're not as angry as some retail longs...huh?

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 5:19 PM Flag

    MM's future at the company is not for you or any other small fish to decide. yes, that's right, you or any other retailers don't get to dictate corporate decisions. so, unlike an election, your voice don't count no matter how long you've been a bag holder or how loud you scream. whether or not MM keeps his jobs will depend on the relationship has has with the large stakeholders. notice i didn't say shareholders. also, just in case you haven't figured it out, the current large holders of exel probably are completely different from b/f it became apparent that comet was going to fail. So, MM will keep or loss is job based on his relationship with these new stakeholders and not you and your complaints. does the truth hurt?

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 4:59 PM Flag

    your suggestion to basically fold the company is idiotic b/c there are strong data to support success for both the METEOR and CELESTIAL trials. the success METEOR and approval of cobi would go a long ways toward providing the company with the financial flexibility it needs to get financing at better terms. needless to say, the stock price would also quickly recover on success of METEOR and revenues from cobi.

    Now, I'm not saying success is guaranteed b/c there are no sure things in drug development but the risk reward does not get any better than this. At the end of the day, it's all about risk reward. the reward is a potential of at lease 500MM/year in revenue if all trials are successful. the risk, is the company being liquidated with cobi having the potential to sell at a price that will not only cover the debt but leave some change over for shareholders. If the best case is realized (which is my bet, and it is a gamble no matter how good i feel about the odds), the company should easily have a market cap of at lease 3 billion (6x rev since there should be more hype about other indications for cabo and cobi). depending on how much dilution we could be looking at a share price of probably 10-15.

    I'm not concerned about their finances b/c unlike you, i don't think they have a capital crisis problem. to me the question is not if they will get financing, but at what cost. I've seen enough companies return from the brink of death to know that so long as they have valuable assets and strong investors following, a deal can always be worked out with wall street. exel has both in spades.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 4:38 PM Flag

    yes, the ir for exel is going read all your wonderful ideas about how their ceo should be fired b/c destroyed the company and that they should sell the company to whoever is interested so they can all be fired for the good of shareholders. when they bring up all your great ideas to the CEO, they can all have a great big laugh at all the idiots on this message board with all their complaints and dooms day predictions. what colorful imagination you have.

    cheers

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 1:06 PM Flag

    what is it about the dangers of comparing results between trials do you not understand?

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 1:01 PM Flag

    if you look at the chart, there were no cheap shares of exel in 2007. if you got in late 2007, it's good that you didn't buy at the high but even at the lows of 2007 the stock was still expensive.

    my point has been the same since my first response to you and that is that you're blinded by your loss and not seeing this low price as an opportunity. instead, everything you're saying equates to having the company fold so you can minimize your loss. You are adding to the paranoia and fear being permeated by shorts.

    as for why i haven't been around, it's b/c i didn't see a reason to start a position until after the comet-1 failure. In my assessment, mCRPC success was a big question mark and was not the sure thing it was being billed by wall street. There was no way i was going to start a position knowing most of exel's value (hype) was being tied to mCRPC being a slam dunk.

    now mCRPC is in the back burner (note i still think there could be a future for cabo in mCRPC in maybe a smaller indication), i see better sailing for cabo in it's other pivotal trials and promise for future indications. On top of that, we should start getting revenue from cobi within a year or so and that should help with our burn and getting better financing terms. Not to mention that cobi itself has great potential for approval in other indications.

    MM didn't cost me any money and he gave us this great buying opportunity by going for the home run with mCRPC. I didn't agree with this move so i sat on the sideline watching the process unfold. so as a new investor, i've got no gripe to pick with him. No doubt his judgement has been bad but it was also smart that he didn't place all of their eggs in mCRPC since he obviously had a plan for mCRPC failure. I'm optimistic he will do what is needed to get us through the readout for the next two pivotal trials. i'm prepared for dilution.

    my position in exel and opposition to your rant should be clear now, yes?

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 8, 2014 3:28 AM Flag

    what are you talking about HR for Prednisone? do you even know what an hr is? do you know HR is computed by comparing two different arms? do you know there's no such thing as HR for Prednisone? Do you know that you can't compare results across trials?

    do you even know what a confidence interval is? did i say anything about the results being stat sig? learn to read! I said the os hr is 0.9 in the comet trial. that's a fact! did i say if you ran the trail again that it would be 0.9 again? NO!!! i didn't b/c the confidence interval said it could be worse and it also says it could be better! All we know is what happened in this trail and the fact is that the treatment arm lived longer than the control arm which was the opposite of what you said... so you LIED!

    Not only is your theory a joke, you're a joke. Now i know you're a hack without any background in medicine or science or statistics. Have fun by yourself faker; i've concluded you bring nothing to the table.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 9:38 PM Flag

    the only thing you've done is show that your theory is a joke and you're married to it.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 9:37 PM Flag

    did you even look at the press release for the comet-1 failure? os had an HR of 0.9. you know that means more ppl died in the Prednisone arm than the cabo arm... not the other way around as you believe

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 9:27 PM Flag

    i agree with you that comet-1 was flawed. that's why i never bought into the hype. there was not data that showed the drug had any strong effect on survival. the data in mCRPC in showed that the drug had activity in the tumor, but a lot of drug has had effect on the tumor in mCRPC that did not translate to OS. There was not enough data to justify an OS end point. too bad the FDA does not except PFS for mCRPC or the trial would have been a slam dunk b/c the earlier studies backed a strong PFS effect.

    The FDA did not make any definitive statement on enterohepatic recirculation regarding a negative effect on efficacy. they only said this was still not well understood and more studies was needed. the FDA's concern with enterohepatic recirculation seems to have more to do with negative drug drug interaction.

    What are you talking about measuring PFS external to the intestines? PFS is a direct measure of how long a disease is stable so it's a direct measurement of the effect of the drug on the tumors in the organ. There is no external PFS effect or whatever it is you're trying to convince yourself. you can continue to believe in your theory, that's your rights. but when you continue to believe something that is not back by real data, the only person you're harming is yourself.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 7:47 PM Flag

    So, what if PFS is not correlated to survival in mCRPC or is not a primary end point or how all the theories in your head makes sense. PFS is a measure of a drug's efficacy on the tumor (which does not always correlate to OS for some diseases) and that's why they take the time to measure it. If we see a PFS, we KNOW that the drug is acting on the tumor.

    your whole theory revolves around the drug not working b/c it's not being distributed to other organs in the body except the liver. well, if the drug is not making it to the prostate like your theorized, then explain why we're seeing PFS?

    none of your points explains the obvious contradiction btw your theory and the empirical data that PFS was greatly improved in mCRPC. if you're a science guy like you say you are, then you should know that data TRUMPS theory. when theory and data don't coalesce, you don't throw away the data; instead, you throw away the theory.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 7:22 PM Flag

    kav, you know that urabt has been completely wrong on exel, right? from the moment he bought exel in 2007 at the height of hype and price and then holding all these years only to dumbfoundedly see his investments in exel dive down to almost nothing without doing anything to limit his loss. after being so wrong in exel, you think what he's saying now will be right? once a fool always a fool... keep that in mind.

  • dawginlife dawginlife Oct 7, 2014 6:50 PM Flag

    socialidiocies, you keep on saying that comet-1 failed b/c the drug couldn't get to the prostate; however, you are BLINDLY ignoring the FACT that PFS was significantly reduced with an HR = 0.5. NOW, will you kindly explain how your theory is not WRONG given the obvious efficacy seen with PFS...

    UNLESS you can scientifically explain how we can see such a STRONG PFS result without the drug being delivered to the Prostate as you theorized for the failure of OS, than your theory is a JOKE along with your self-professed scientific expertise.

    cheers

  • Reply to

    time to..

    by urabt2 Oct 4, 2014 2:00 PM
    dawginlife dawginlife Oct 6, 2014 5:16 PM Flag

    that's the source of your mistake... trying to apply fundamental analysis to a startup biotech which trades on data, science, and hope... how is you experience going to help you in "correctly" price hope and unpredictable data? you need to either change your model or get out of biotech investing.

THLD
2.95+0.01(+0.34%)12:43 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.