No dilution likely for over a year. They have a decent pile of cash thanks to NVS returning MEK-162. The P3s for Selumetnib are all on AZN, and the P3s for 162 and 818 are almost all on NVS.
The biggest dilution fear had been that they would push the 2 blood cancer drugs to hard. But this seams unlikely now that they have several shots on goal w/o them.
Of course the present PPS is a lot higher than 2 weeks ago. But that is another story.
Given the huge pop, the ability to hold anywhere near $7 surprised me. I expected a drop back to the mid-low 6's.
So I see a very strong chart.
The new drug is primarily melanoma, true.
The 2 MEKs (selumetnib with AstraZ and binitumab ) are in about 60 trials across many indications. And 6 P3 trials are in progress.
They also have several other candidates that are in P2 for various indications.
It is OK to be ignorant, but it is stupid to give advice w/o trying to learn how ignorant you are.
Correction, looks like they will be looking at the IRAK4 agent in lymphomas.
Aurgene's pattent and some other papers indicated anti autoimmune as the purpose, but there is some comonality here. Rituxan for example is used in both settings.
I am real skeptical of the PDL-1 agent from a practical perspective. They will be chasing several other VERY well funded outfits that have a clear first mover advantage. So this will not have to be just a little better than existing agents, it will have to be a lot better. And it will still be expensive to develope.
The IRAK4 agent seams more a candidate for CRIS. It is an anti autoimmune disiese (and similar) drug candidate. As a novel agent (I have not seen anything else in this space) it is an easier (and cheaper) path. Also, I like getting out of the oncology space, too corwded. The risk of failure is high though.
It will of course a couple years before we start getting any decent reads.
Technically true. But they have 31% of existing shares contractually committed to tendering if needed, and 5M new shares.
That leaves so few shares needed from elsewhere that this is a done deal.
Though I believe ENTA is worth north of $60 by spring, you have to be careful about using P/E ratios on this type investment. A DCF model is MUCH more rational.
The reason is that the vast majority of their revs are part of a single drug that will have milestones, then quickly hit peek sales, then decline (over some uncertain time frame). Even the second gen HCV agent just tweeks this a bit.
Who cares? Nobody is pencilling in any significant revenue from outside US/EU/Japan and a few otehr western countries. Countries like India and China add zero to the value of an expensive drug.
An Indian infringer can not sell in countries where the patent is valid.
I will answer that for my case.
I do not trust management for good reason. The existing drugs arecommercially marginal. And the pipeline has some ability to produce a "decent" drug, but I do not see a true blockbuster,
All that factors into the company we look at today, and is why the stock is where it is.
That said, I see a company that can become a decent specialty pahrama and have solid enough numbers to deserve a PPS in the teens. And not really much risk here.
Refineries can be profitable regardless of the price of crude. The Trainer losses a year ago were driven by a failure in the ethanol credit market (which they must buy as they can not blend ethanol into jet fuel). That market has since normalized.
Hedges are a modest issue. In the long run they should average out (unless one is speculating as opposed to true heding).
Q4 improved both load and PRASM over '13 numbers.
On load, the domestic numbers are much improved. On PRASM, not yet known, but I suspect domestic also was much improved (as we know international was imapired by the strong dollar).
The month of Dec was off. But that is only a portion of the data and is comparing different travel weeks from last year.
Last election was very close.
I would think the non-union vote would be stroinger this time around. Some of the old NWA (ex-union) FAs will be retired. And the profit sharing checks are in the bank.
That they signed up enough to call for a vote does not imply the union will win the vote. First, the card signing process is one sided. Second, a fair number of people will think a vote is reasonable even if they later vote no.
They will accept bids (I do not know if they are sealed or not) up until 1/27. If they get 2 or more qualified bids they will then have an auction (conituously accepting higher bids) between those bidders on Feb 3rd.
Roche certainly does have to pay royalties and milestones for the ex-US market. From the SEC docs (See about 2/3 of the way down).
"Pursuant to the Ex-U.S. Commercialization Agreement, Roche will have the right to commercialize the Company’s existing clinical diagnostic testing products, including FoundationOne and FoundationOne Heme, any clinical diagnostic products developed under the R&D Collaboration Agreement and any other products upon mutual agreement. Beginning one year after the execution of the Ex-U.S. Commercialization Agreement, Roche will have the exclusive right to commercialize such products worldwide, excluding the United States and any countries Roche elects to exclude during the first year of the term. Roche also holds a right of first negotiation with respect to the commercialization of the Company’s future clinical diagnostic products, excluding in vitro diagnostic tests and companion diagnostic products developed by the Company for third parties. Roche may pay the Company an agreed amount for the right to extend the launch timeline for FoundationOne and FoundationOne Heme by specified periods in specified countries. Roche will also pay agreed upon royalties and commercial milestones. Further, if Roche fails to meet certain minimum revenue requirements for FoundationOne or FoundationOne Heme tests in three consecutive years in a specified country, the Company has the right to terminate Roche’s exclusive commercialization rights in the applicable country. The Ex-U.S. Commercialization Agreement will remain in effect for five years and may be extended by Roche for additional two-year periods. Roche shall have the right to terminate the agreement without cause upon six months’ written notice after the initial five year term, and either party may terminate in the event of breach by the other party. "
Bionche's Urocidin by a new name.
This is the drug whos P3 died out several years ago and Endo (who had previously partnered it) gave up and returned it. Now under a new name they are going to file a BLA based on the earlier trial data that they have had for years. Right.
Did Endo not realize that all they ever had to do was just file the paperwork?
New company name.
New drug name.
Same old Y!MB pumping that spammed every biotech board for half a decade pumping this Canadian penny stock bio-scam.
Don't forget that if one owns the stock they can sell to Roche via the tender at $50.
The offer might be oversubscribed, so it is possible that not all of ones shares get sold. But the minimum will be about 50%, and very likely substantially higher. We know that a good chunk of insider shares are not panned on being tendered. And it is very likely more than a trivial amount of retail shares do not get tendered.
Get back to you in about a month if you are still around.