Finishing near the days high is a positive and looking for some more progress if the Biotech sector continues to rally as today. I did not see anything particularly about ARWR today other than it is an undervalued biotech that is moving up nicely with the group and still has quite a ways to go before any really exciting break outs are recorded. Looking to see if we can get some news that will allow ARWR to get over its 200 day MA, and ultimately climb back above $10 this year.
There really has not been enough attention on Cohort 6, the multi dose cohort, which ARWR management sloughed off as not making a difference. But, the way I look at it, it does make a significant undiscussed contribution to the knowledge about ARC-520.
Firstly, with all the new chimp data, no one mentioned that this cohort 6 almost exactly reproduces in Humans what that first chimp study showed in chimps, ie similar to the chimp (bye bye lawsuit).
Secondly, remember that conference call before AD when the Analysts were asking CA if any of the cohorts would be multiple dose and we were all speculating if they would or would not have the power legally to do multiple dose trials. Well they split the 4 mg and gave 2 doses of 2 mpk, and walla, they were doing a multiple dose arm.
Third, this was compressed in time and it did not develop toxicities, or SAEs, so doesn't that help with the upcoming discussions with the FDA about lifting the PCH? They already have some human 1 mpk from the US trials, and some 2 mpk from the China trials. I don't know if they still want to test 4 mpk in the US, but if they do, will the FDA say yes? Better chance now since the chimps handled 4 mpk well.
Does anyone else have any thoughts about cohort 6?
Yes, there is no comparison between BMRNs problems and ARWR.
In addition to their major toxicity issues, which could be tolerated because there are no drugs and a serious unmet need for a fatal inherited deficiency, they are not using RNAi to silence a gene. Rather the problem is to activate a gene and they are trying to get the body to make deficient proteins, not block bad ones. The entire problem they are experiencing is that they have no evidence of efficacy. They have no statistically significant amount of the missing protein generated by their drug, and in the 6 minute walk test, there is no indication of effectiveness. The placebos are doing better than the drug. It is a total clusterfuk drug, unfortunately.
ARWR is in every way not comparable and the shorts that brought BMRN problems to our attention again only show how little these shorts know about the subject. Weak arguments from shorts just make me more sure ARWR is on the right track.
So, on the Day before thanksgiving, ARWR pops back over $6 and looks like this time it will hold above the 50 day MA.
You know what that means. It is going to make a try to recover over the 200 day MA and officially start an up move. Should see a golden cross by the end of the year if this keeps up.
BUT the only fly in the ointment is low volume. Would like to see some substantial institutional action.
Think about where the shorts have their stops and mental stops as someone has perhaps decided to go after them during the holiday period when they might not be watching, LOL.
Any chance we could hit $9.40 and really wake them up!!!
You sound like the opening lines of Notes From Underground which opens thusly.
"I am a sick man.... I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man. I believe my liver is diseased. However, I know nothing at all about my disease, and do not know for certain what ails me. I don't consult a doctor for it, and never have, though I have a respect for medicine and doctors. Besides, I am extremely superstitious, sufficiently so to respect medicine, anyway (I am well-educated enough not to be superstitious, but I am superstitious). No, I refuse to consult a doctor from spite. That you probably will not understand. Well, I understand it, though. Of course, I can't explain who it is precisely that I am mortifying in this case by my spite: I am perfectly well aware that I cannot "pay out" the doctors by not consulting them; I know better than anyone that by all this I am only injuring myself and no one else. But still, if I don't consult a doctor it is from spite. My liver is bad, well--let it get worse!"
All I know is a hostile offer is possible, but I don't think it is likely at this stage. Maybe holden is not exactly who he says, who knows with an anomous board, but he is not here to keep the pps down, IMO. Anyone that loves The Lord of the Rings may have his own fantasy world, but I think he is not working for a buyer, and that actually is pretty funny idea. He has a point of view, like all of us, but I don't think his is 180 degrees of misdirection.Lol.
Mostly I agree with him, and just argue with him for kicks and giggles because he is entertaining and informative too.
Interesting that you are trying to lecture me on corporate control.
Do YOU know who owns a corporation? Clue, it is the ones that own the stock.
Do you know who elects the BOD? It is the ones that own the stock.
Do you know who controls the BOD by selecting it? It is the ones that own the stock.
Do you know to who the BOD owes a fiduciary duty to act solely on their behalf? It is the ones that own the stock.
Do you know who owns the controlling stock?
Clue, it is not CA or all insiders combined, who own just 6% of the stock, the last I looked.
Do you know that CA tried to pass a bylaw to prevent a corporate raid on BOD positions, but that did not pass?
Do you know that was a clear declaration that Tute retained the right to elect a BOD to facilitate a hostile take over.
Do you know that a large bidder can gain support of the Tutes who would accept an offer that CA might like to reject.
Do you know the officers also work for the shareholders who own controlling votes.
For the above reasons, the officers will remain independent at the will and wims of the owners, and you have poo all over your face., CA is in control as long as the majority owners say so. If, eg, GILD makes a respectable bid, that control is in flux.
Why does everyone know these things except you?
You look like the the pompous ignoramus that does not know poo about how a public company works. Good thing you are not in charge, lol.
For day and swing traders, yes.
But, things can be viewed in different time frames, where blinks don't count for much.
When the frog got stung by the scorpion crossing the river, the scorpion died, but it was just in his nature to sting the frog. We have some 120 M shares held short by scorpions who have climbed onto their frogs and are proceeding across the river. How long will their frog last?
It should keep dropping. After all, what is the risk reward for being short here. In one day, you might make 50 cents if you time it right or you might loose $10 on a partnership announcement. That puts you at risk 20 to 1 if your short. Indeed, there really is no limit how high it might rise or how fast. But the downside is certainly very limited by the Roche and NVS assets, $100 M cash, and 6 pipeline products all of which show RNAi KD with a successful and safe DPC platform.
When the frog got stung by the scorpion crossing the river, the scorpion died, but it was just in his nature to sting the frog. We have some 13.9 M shares held short by scorpions who have climbed onto their frogs and are proceeding across the river. How long will their frog last?
There is only one reason this post has 41 down votes. There are 41 shorts that are trying to obscure how well Afrezza works! Or probably one of them posted under 41 aliases just to give it thumbs down. Hahaha.
When you are trying to compute potential income from a cancer drug, their are two important numbers you need to look up. First is "Prevalence". That tells you how many cases there are right now in the territory you are interested in. Then is "Incidence". That tells you how many new cases there are per year. There is much more to know, but those are the starting points.
So, for example, suppose there are 100,000 cases of kidney cancer in the US right now. That is the prevalence of the disease. If you develop a cure, you would have that base of patients to cure, right off the bat.
Then you look at how many new cases are diagnosed each year, the "incidence" and you get a feel for the income stream from a successful drug over say, 10 years.
Of course you need some assumptions about the selling price and the part of the patient population that will use the drug.
It gets dicey to compute real numbers when you start guessing about how competition will come in and whether other drugs will displace the one that you are valuing. They practically all have a limited life but some cemo drugs have been around since the 1960s, like doxorubicin.
Even prevalence of 12,000 patients and incidence of 3,000 patients annually, which is the case of myelofibrosis that GERNs Imelestat may cure in 20% of the cases can get a partnership with contingent milestones of $1 Billion, (as Gern has with J&J).
The upside of cancer drugs, not to mention the potential for one that would replace chemo or target chemo to the cancer instead of systematically, is incalculable.
If they really start attracting multiple partners, you have to wonder how long they would stay independent. With $150 Billion dollar acquisitions happening this year, it is pretty easy to imagine ARWR will get bought out. I just hope it does not happen till after they have some drugs approved, and the PPS has gotten to something that makes sense.
I am back to this post again, as once again ARWR is trying to break through its 50 Day MA, now dropped to $5.78. The broad market is tarting to turn up as the DJIA has just gone green. May the bios will rally and ARWR will get a lift.
Think for a second about the connection between JUSTICE and SCIENCE.
When we have a case where justice is being weighed, we look to evidence and proofs to decide a just result.
When we have a scientific question such as how much KD will ARC-520 achieve, we look to evidence and proofs of that question too.
The science has proved the justice of the statements made and justice will only be served if the case claiming that was a lie should be dismissed. Do you think the judge is stupid? I don't.
When those suits were filed, the plaintiffs had a hard time finding a class action representative. They kept advertising their "investigation" every day for a month or 45 days looking for someone with a large loss to sign on. They really don't represent anyone. Shareholders all hate what these Plaintiffs are doing in hurting the company. They sue in the name of shareholders that what they are doing and don't support the, solely to exact their fees. I am not against plaintiffs' lawyers by any means and I think they do an important job, but this is a frivolous suit, IMO.
When you look at Post, a doctor, who understands the job of helping patients, crying out distressed and agonized over what the shorts are doing to a good company, one that is working to help cure disease and help people, and you think about these bloodhounding plaintiffs who will not voluntarily dismiss their claims when the AD shows that the KD is over 1 log on 3 and 4 mg, I have to think that justice should crush the attorneys and the shorts.
Will justice prevail? I am expecting it will. Some shorts will see their position is weak and they will move on, but others simply have different values and, like the terrorists they are, will just hang on out of spite.