From the CEO during the conference call mid August:
e, there will be additional secondary endpoints and exploratory analysis available from the trial, but those are still under evaluation and we are reserving these for a presentation at a future medical meeting.
What's happening on these small stock secondaries, is that once the price is set they tend to go up quickly beyond the secondary price. My theory is that the secondary sets a floor on price and adds legitimacy to the company and to the current stock price, especially when legends like the Baker Brothers show their confidence in it by buying nearly half of the secondary!
I forgot they owned a bunch of shares already. Who knows what these boys are up to. I suspect that some new data may emerge out on the presentation on the 18th at the 2015 Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Study of BPS (ESSIC). Not sure if patients were allowed to continue open label, but if they did...
Baker Brother bought 48% of the secondary offering at $15.50 a share. That's what drove the price AH. It must be nice to be a Baker. You make 28% on your money just because **you** bought something!
I swear, whenever we've got Mac and direction posting at once I feel like I'm watching Hitchcock's Psycho.
Scalpel - I agree - this is a ~$300 market cap net of cash with two potential blockbuster drugs. TRV130 has a bigger revenue potential than Pacira's EXPAREL, but that drug has helped fuel Pacira to a $2 billion valuation. I think a Pfizer may come along and acquire Trevena before it gets too big for its britches, if they'd even sell at this point. Pre-2A results on TRV130, much of the market was expecting a flopped trial, so the company was severely undervalued as a result. Now it is still severely undervalued, but the market has to catch up to the idea that it still is in spite of the 50%+ move that just occurred.
No don't know about 20@, but I do know that this company should be at 15 right now, or about 1.2 billion market cap, given the potential of imelestat.
Just to add to what itsupfromhere says, most institutional ownership doesn't come from the float. They are either allocated shares from the IPO (to make the book), or from shelf placements, or from secondary offerings. But they'll buy from the open market if the price is right, and if the float is large enough for the price to hold up in a sale (unless their intent is to manipulate the price buy manipulating a small float)
This deal will get done. Shire has gone hostile on Baxalta, and Baxalta doesn't have the time to start this process over on another company. They'll pay a few hundred to get it done in order to derail Shire.
Can you please post a link that documents this? Thank you!
"The FACT that the co-therapy of SD-101 and a PD-1 inhibitor resulted in a PERFECT 100% SURVIVAL and 100% COMPLETE REMISSIONS in pre-clinical studies against melanoma..."
Hey, bourbon on cornflakes may be gross, but bourbon definitely knows his Swiss. I spent years 13-16 in a Swiss boarding school in Fribourg (not Freiburg, which is in Germany, mind you), and those are indeed the four languages the Swiss speak...well... You can make it five and a half, because most Swiss speak English, and most speak both proper German as well as their Switze-Deutch (which I may have misspelled! But back to AVXL. I'm sure I'm not the only one that was in PRAN, or a myriad of other names that have failed in AD. Nonetheless, I'm intrigued with the synergy between Donepezil and 2-73, even though it didn't work with memantine (two different mechanisms of action). Both are $2 billion drugs, roughly speaking, but NIH says Donepezil is slightly more cost-effective, so if the 4x 2-73+Donepezil scores hold up over Donepezil alone, we are in big business. But as I've suggested, this is highly speculative stuff, so make sure you know what your #$%$ looks like so you know what you'd be losing, just in case. ;-)