Recent

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

Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

dr.vinmantoo 140 posts  |  Last Activity: 5 hours ago Member since: May 18, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Cloaked protector was once again spouting nonsense that PPHM could submit a BLA for Bavi based on the failed Sunrise trial. CorporalAgarn and Carboat are properly taking him to task.

    CorporalAgarn smacked CP with the following {{It is wrong. They are not going to file a BLA based on this failed trial. It really is as simple as that. You are waiting for them to specifically state this when there really is no need to do so. It is known.}}

    I joined into the fun with to try and explain how CP might have gotten to such a wrong conclusion.

    {{This is really a 2-part issue. First, PPHM is NOT going to file a BLA based on Sunrise or the small corrupted and now thoroughly discredited phase II Bavi+ DOC. Second, even if PPHM was dumb enough or desperate enough to file a BLA, the FDA would summarily reject it because it won't be based on any data from a completed trial, let alone successful trial. The only thing I can think of is that CP is using a mathematical principal to support his claim. A negative times a negative makes a positive. That is why he thinks PPHM will get FDA approval for Bavi.}}

    Apparently this is too much for the IHUB longs to bear, some humor to explain someone posting delusional fantasies about PPHM getting Bavi approved based on the failed Sunshine trial so my post was deleted. I contested the deletion.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 4, 2016 12:25 PM Flag

    The IHub board is especially funny today. CP is in full delusion mode trying to convince others that Sunrise actually proved that Bavi works, and that PPHM is in a strong position now. Carboat and PPHMTOOLONG are having a field day trying to smack some sense into him. Meanwhile, PPHM begins a slow inexorable slide even lower. $0.40 is now fondly recalled as the good old days.

  • Reply to

    ER tomorrow..

    by dartgator May 3, 2016 8:01 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 4, 2016 12:09 PM Flag

    Hey Ernie, its been a long time since I have read your posts on yahoo. My thoughts are not to sell any EXEL shares until we start seeing some sales in RCC. The debt on the EXEL books is part of the reasons to lighten up, but only at the right price.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 4, 2016 12:05 PM Flag

    It is always fun being a shareholder when a buyout becomes a competition. The issue becomes determine what percentage of your shares you what to sell and at what price as the competition heats up as the market tends to overshoot the price. I don't think we near at that point yet.

  • Reply to

    upfront 70 million?

    by cartercancer May 3, 2016 1:07 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 4, 2016 12:01 PM Flag

    PGNX management will tell us the silence is for competitive reasons. Switching on the BS translator, that means the upfront payment is for less than $1 million.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 4, 2016 1:22 AM Flag

    The funniest thing, or more accurately, the saddest thing is when you see PPHM longs listing their long-term sentiment as strong buy. You have to wonder just how bad the news for PPHM has to get before they become less confident in PPHM's prospects.

  • Reply to

    upfront 70 million?

    by cartercancer May 3, 2016 1:07 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 3, 2016 2:55 PM Flag

    I would be shocked if an upfront payment was as high as $10 million.

  • Reply to

    Great news.

    by cal_doon May 2, 2016 9:23 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 2, 2016 6:11 PM Flag

    pedmac, Man, we must be idiots for being in PGNX this long. At least I did some selling and buying back, but sadly I wasn't smart enough to sell when PGNX hits some high points. I don't think PGNX gave us much info when they sold off PRO140 and the C. difficile areas either. Frustrating to say the least.

  • Reply to

    Great news.

    by cal_doon May 2, 2016 9:23 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 2, 2016 1:31 PM Flag

    What did PGNX get in upfront milestones? Was it a case of Budweiser and some box seats to a Yankees game? This kind of secrecy is BS

  • Reply to

    A well written letter

    by credtrtrteingyt Apr 29, 2016 9:03 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 1, 2016 1:15 PM Flag

    {{durango, I am not knocking MDVN, I would just like to point out that there's a lot of smaller bios with low PEs and hi growth, and lots of potential. }}

    Soflaturte, really????? Profitable biotechs are rare indeed, and those with low PEs are even rarer. Could you give us a list of such small profitable bios? I am guessing you could count them on the fingers of one hand, that is, if you could find any.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo May 1, 2016 1:11 PM Flag

    Yes, tell her go to a major oncology center that has expertise in breast cancer. Let them give her their opinions. It would be a plus if they sequenced her tumor cells to get a genetic handle of the growth and survival mutations driving tumor growth and metastasis.

  • Reply to

    MDVN is a great company in Cancer treatment

    by wsun09 Apr 28, 2016 12:53 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 28, 2016 11:21 AM Flag

    What are you babbling about? Provenge was approved but it wasn't cost effective (profitable) or very effective for that matter.

  • Reply to

    Insulting lowball offer

    by durangokidd2106 Apr 28, 2016 8:37 AM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 28, 2016 11:00 AM Flag

    Hey delphi, why are you repeating your comment 50x? You should post your "thoughts" once then #$%$ and get lost. If you love AMAG, then load up on it by buying as much as you can then buy some calls. That has nothing to do with whether or not someone should buy or sell MDVN. Sheesh.

    Where do these idiots come from? Must be a short who has been severely burned by the recent MDVN run-up and is worried about getting burned even more by a buyout. That would make me laugh, and make me a lot more money as well.

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 23, 2016 1:46 PM Flag

    Brad,

    {{Vinny since you can post on the Hump could you ask the favored few over there who actually get replies from IR to ask them where the he11 Garnick is and why has he not updated on Sunrise himself? Is he still associated with PPHM in the same manner as before and during the trial or has something changed since?}}

    it looks like Carboat and corporalagarn (love than screen alias) are already doing that repeatedly. They are both quite amusing. It will be funny to watch the pumper longs who have been spewing the "In Garnick we trust" mantra quickly trash him once PPHM acknowledges he is gone. Based on PPHM's modus operandi, I expect that his name will be quietly removed for the web site without any PR.

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 23, 2016 1:40 PM Flag

    Jeff, you also wrote {{What I am banking on is that PPHM eventually makes a partnering deal to push forward with I/O combo trials that I believe will be successful. I am hopeful that a partnership deal will be finalized prior to the ASM or soon thereafter. Without that, it would appear that we current shareholders will likely have to suffer through another R/S and thus be further diluted to the point that the most we can hope for will be a meager profit and that will not be seen for at least several more years. And yes, I will likely wait for it and not sell any of my shares}}

    Do whatever you like with your shares and base it on whatever hopes you have for Bavi in immune modulator trials. I will repeat what I wrote before. As far as combinations with immune modulators, that is field and growing more and more crowded each day. Companies with big money are using combinations of drugs they own, and where each drug on its own has shown efficacy on its own so they are looking for synergism. There is ZERO clinical data for Bavi having good efficacy as a single agent and ZERO clinical data for Bavi in an combination with an immune modulator. Yet for some reason you are confident it will shine. No FUD for you like there is none for other pumpers. Good luck to you. You will need it!

    You actually think PPHM will be able to get a partnership deal soon. Let's be clear about what a normal investor considers a partnership. It is not where PPHM pays someone else to include Bavi in any pre-clinicial studies or clinical trials. It is where another company agrees to pay PPHM significant up front money, say over at least $20 million, provides for significant milestones far in excess of upfront money, and takes over much if not all the developmental costs and grants PPHM a percentage of future sales. I predict that PPHM won't be involved in such a deal this year. What say you?

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 23, 2016 1:29 PM Flag

    Jeff, then you wrote {{My take is that I don't have a clue about whether they somehow can salvage Sunrise in combo with previous trial stage data. We do not have enough information to determine what they can do. Part of me says no way, but the argument that they can is compelling if they were to discover something in the data that may sway the FDA. I am not banking on this.}}

    This is the delusional type of post I cringe at and feel compelled to address. What in Gd's name are you talking about with your "swaying" the FDA. The only thing I can conclude is you ACTUALLY STILL fantasize that the FDA can approve Bavi + DOC in NSCLC based on Sunrise. That is NOT possible and is sheer nonsense. If you keep posting that there is any chance the FDA can be persuaded to approve Bavi based on Sunrise, you will correctly be called a lying pumper and a complete imbecile. Stop it.

    Yes PPHM can keep looking at the data, and possibly find a biomarker that correlates with better outcome. If so than you can hope that PPHM might start a completely new trial from scratch based on that biomarker, but that seems like a foolish strategy and a waste of money to me.

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 23, 2016 1:17 PM Flag

    Jeff, I suggest you stop behaving like a 4 year-old by lashing out with name calling when others post facts that you don't like. It is fine by me if you want to embarrass yourself by the kind of posts you just made. I am sorry to see anyone lose money, but it is even sadder when those people won't accept the reality that they have lost money or objectively look at the trial data that caused them to lose money. What is far worse, and completely unacceptable to me is when people keep pushing fantasies that might mislead others.

    Yes I wrote {{What IS unethical is longs fawning over the PR then claiming it that they have no doubts or worries because it proves Bavi works, and that the Sunrise data will be the basis for FDA approval when the FDA throws out the control arm}}

    You responded {{The wording of this makes it unclear whether you are impugning the Sunrise trial or Bavi with your response towards what others believe. This is why I asked whether you believe Bavi works or not....it was unclear and I wanted to know what you thought....which is why I asked instead of directly calling you out.}}

    There is NOTHING unclear about my response. The PPHM PR is about the Sunrise trial and and comments were about the Sunrise trial data. How much clearer could I have been?

    Then you write {{Bavi does work IMO, but likely its best commercial use has still to be evaluated and approved. Most likely that will come from the I/O types of treatment.}}

    There is no clinical trial data showing BAVI works in any chemo combination trial. By working, that means a statistically significant improvement in MOS or HR in comparison to a control and in an uncorrupted trial. That is what any reasonably intelligent person/investor would want to see before declaring that Bavi works.

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 21, 2016 9:00 PM Flag

    Oh the irony of a poster calling other posters morons when he can't grasp a simple statement. The is what I wrote.

    {{No, the pumpers need to stop fawning over a PR which carries zero weight and stop denying that Sunrise is not only merely dead, but most sincerely dead. }}

    The is what Jeff wrote.

    {{Just to be clear on your position, are you saying Bavi is completely "dead" or just with chemo combo's? If the former, you are saying that it will absolutely not help with I/O? Just want to know if you are just a doubter, or a complete moron.}}

    I only posted about Sunrise. Are you so stupid that you can't recognize that, or simply so much of a pumper that you can't face reality? My comments have been accurate and specific but you, like most PPHM pumpers, can't accept the reality that Sunrise is dead so resort to name calling. Why not post any comment where I have said something even remotely inaccurate? You can't because you a moron lashing out. I have news for you, name calling won't help PPHM get out of the hole is has dug for itself.

    {{You may have a case with chemo combo being somewhat dead, but in no way is I/O combos dead....that apparently is where Bavi can and will likely shine...imo and in other very smart person's opinion.}}

    No, it isn't that I MAY have a case. My case is very solid as Bavi + DOC is dead, dead, dead. PPHM has stopped all those trials. What more evidence do you need.? As far as combinations with immune modulators, that is field and growing more and more crowded each day. Companies with big money are using combinations of drugs they own, and where each drug on its own has shown efficacy on its own so they are looking for synergism. There is ZERO clinical data for Bavi having good efficacy as a single agent and ZERO clinical data for Bavi in an combination with an immune modulator. Yet for some reason you are confident it will shine. No FUD for you like there is none for other pumpers. Good luck to you. You will need it!

  • Reply to

    Trial Data

    by rabies_00 Apr 20, 2016 3:35 PM
    dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 21, 2016 12:20 PM Flag

    {{Dr Pepper and others seem to be hung up on some childishly perceived notion that complete trial data should be released prior to the conclusion of a trial. WRONG! It would be highly unethical to release full figured results during a first look in PR. }}

    You have got to be joking. Releasing an analysis of the data at first look-in is certainly NOT unethical as the trial is over. What IS unethical is longs fawning over the PR then claiming it that they have no doubts or worries because it proves Bavi works, and that the Sunrise data will be the basis for FDA approval when the FDA throws out the control arm. What kind of morons ridicule FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) after a flameout as spectacular as Bavi just experienced? No, the pumpers need to stop fawning over a PR which carries zero weight and stop denying that Sunrise is not only merely dead, but most sincerely dead. If they want to point to the PR as proof of how wonderful Bavi is, then they need the data to back it up or #$%$.

    {{The press release was done flawlessly and Peregrine continues to flaunt the link to it on their home page. }}

    Of course PPHM has that PR on their web site. They have nothing else to say. The press release is a piece of fluff with no data, but is designed to try make appear to uninformed investors that the failed Sunrise trial it isn't an utter and complete failure. Apparently that tactic has worked on you, and a few others. By the way, the PR is vague and has lots of wiggle room in it since it contains NO data.

  • dr.vinmantoo dr.vinmantoo Apr 19, 2016 12:25 PM Flag

    Bungler didn't like my comment so poster this response

    {{It's very simple. What does "perform as expected" mean, other than perform according to the trial design, such that if the control group also performed as expected according to the trial design, there would be grounds for approval?}}

    I followed with this post, which was deleted but then restored after my challenge.

    {{What does perform as expected mean? If they thought the MOS would be 12 months and it was 11.5 months would that qualify? What about 11 months? What about 10.5 months? What is the cutoff for performing as expected vs not performing as expected?

    More to the point, PPHM didn't have a good estimate for how Bavi would perform because the phase II 3m/kg was for only 20 patients, and that was skewed by several patients being lost to that arm. At best PPHM had a only a rough estimate of how Bavi would perform.

    As far as the wondrous PS pathway that some keep touting, I sure hope you don't place all your eggs in one basket, especially the PPHM basket. The smart move would be to invest in multiple companies involved in immune modulation, including those in the PS pathway.

    By the way, MDVN is now my largest position since the run up on the buyout buzz. I was lucky enough to buy more a months or so ago in the $30s when all biotech was being slammed. PGNX has surged to second place.}}

    I added the MDVN comment because someone mentioned it on the board. I should have just stuck to MDVN since that was on the board for some reason but I got carried away as both MDVN and PGNX have been going up.

PGNX
5.00-0.19(-3.66%)May 5 4:00 PMEDT