Whoever posted the .01 could have caused the average earnings estimates to plummet. Given the wide spread it would be interesting to see what the estimates would be without the outlandishly high and outrageously low. It is clear there is no consensus. Without a whole lot of effort my guess will be (clearly most of the analyst are just guessing) 0.41.
Earning estimates run from .01 to .75, thats quite a gap. You would think they would have the script data and could narrow it down a little tighter than that. Astellas saw fit to put out a press release three weeks after the quarter/year was over and three weeks prior to officially reporting to announce sales exceeded previous forecasts. They specifically mentioned Xtandi as one of two drugs driving their growth. I would put a whole lot more faith in that then the clown claiming .01 earnings.
It's very curious that dwindling storage was all we were hearing about and than all of a sudden no news on this topic. I don't believe the over supply problem corrected itself overnight, perhaps the storage issue was overblown?
Interesting to note that the analyst have been steadily revising downward the earnings forecast for MDVN for the past and future.
Astellas revised/increased sales estimates for the fiscal year ended March 31 2015 and in part had this to say
"Sales are expected to increase from the previous year due to global expansion of XTANDI for the treatment of prostate cancer and overactive bladder (OAB) treatments Vesicare and Betanis/ Myrbetriq/BETMIGA."
His reply makes me believe he thought the insiders had once held 100% of the stock and since they only hold 1% now must have sold the other 99%? Anyway thats enough time spent on that nonsense.
You said insiders sold out 99% on low 100's and that is false which is why I called you a liar. You obviously have no clue what your talking about nor do you have any knowledge as to this companys structure.
Not sure how a documentary should or would influence a BK decision. You continue with your delusional rants. Time to accept reality and move on.
Thats been pointed out to him and his many alias's. He amazingly never responds to criticism or facts.
A. There is no generic version of Zytiga ready to launch.
B. If there were it would not be $1200.
C. Since you and your other alias's starting posting these lies MDVN has nearly tripled.
Your assumption that all the increase in market cap for VRX is attributed to the acquisition of DNDNQ is what I was speaking of. Your assumption ignores its much larger bid for Salix and the huge run up in biotechs. This is deductive reasoning and in your case is ignoring everything but what you want to believe. This is why you have lost money, you are blind to reality. As for laughing at MDVN's gain during this same time I think you will find being that its a smaller company that the percentage increase was similar to VRX. Of course this would also require deductive reasoning, something you have proven to lack.
Here is another math problem for you genius. Figure the gain or loss of each of these stocks. Once you learn some deductive reasoning skills perhaps you will be able to pick the right stock next time. Of course step one is to admit to your prior mistakes so you don't repeat them.
DNDN $45 to .04
MDVN $8 to $135
Your original estimates and all estimates after were wrong which is why you lost your #$%$. Things are worth what people with the money are willing to pay for them. By the way, MDVN gained 2 billion since the provenge sale. Is that also because of the VRX acquisition?
Ok genius lets review a past post of yours. Keep in mind MDVN had a 2 for 1 split since this and of course DNDN is now trading for four cents.
By berkelygenie.Aug 3, 2012 12:06 PM.Permalink
Why pay $99.59 for MDVN when DNDN is. $4.50. They both extend life by 3 to 4 months for terminal prostate patients. However, DNDN has fewer side effects, is individually tailored and is not a drug, but an immune booster. DNDN is FDA approved, MDVN is not. DNDN owns 100% of Provenge, not half like MDVN and DNDN does not pay a 10% royalty. DNDN owns its patent outright, MDVN is in court to try to control its patent