How many different aliases do you have? Hint: your spelling and style match at least a couple of others on this board and so does your ridiculous conclusion.
Could it be that this board is global and that you're incorrectly speculating that all the posters here celebrate the 4th of July? I could be in Europe for all you know. Learn how to think...
Because the company's performance doesn't live up to its promises, and "forward looking" no longer applies, except for the pumpers. There is nothing to justify a $10 PPS. After a decade in the market the market has learned to discount the hype and trade the spikes.
yborcat, open your mind for once. The cost and reimbursement issues are the concern for the hospital administrators, physician groups and insurance companies who provide and cover the service. That's one of the reasons why other therapies are prefered. Even though the capital expenditure is greater, so is the profit. Healthcare is a business.
Thanks for reposting this. I actually referenced this article last November when the argument about Cesium being more expensive was still in play. The longs have finally given in to that fact, but still cling to the idea that it doesn't matter. It matters.
Final paragraph of the text:
"Finally, 131Cs seeds are more expensive than the alternatives. Even if the cost of seeds is a pass-through, running up the global cost of health care with negligible patient benefit is perverse."
I understood just fine regarding the short comment and I think so did everyone else. My arguments are backed up, not imaginary conclusions. Sorry about that.
He's not short. In fact, my broker has no retail short shares available for ISR and I don't think they ever have. How does that fit your defense that everyone who doesn't like this company has a short position? I have to give you credit for admitting that someone else was smarter. Hold that thought.
The prostate market is down because 5 years ago the medical community decided that fewer screenings and biopsies were warranted, not because I-125 was "too hot." IsoRay's sales decline can be tracked to that pull back almost exactly and Babcock mentioned this in the last 10K. Isotopes have nothing to do with it, and your better isotope was available well before the decision to decrease biopsies. Your DD and inventive assumptions suck.
Sanofi needs to bring the Endos on board with events like the recent ADA and some case studies demonstrating efficacy over extended periods. It's frustrating to be long this stock, but hasn't it always? Whatever the DTC is, it's better than no DTC. In the words of management, BP moves slowly and I think that's exactly the plan. We still have the whole rest of the world waiting for access...
He cares about short term investors because it's the short term investors (a new group every 6 - 12 months) who usually get fleeced for the secondaries after they've jumped on board. The ones who hold this stock for a year or two through all the pumps and dumps wise up and leave (the ones with a brain).
Are you for real? You're comparing a $13B market cap company with 14,000 employees to ISR. Iodine isn't going anywhere and brachy is a small part of Bard's business. I'd say your post is delusional.
C. R. Bard, Inc. designs, manufactures, packages, distributes, and sells medical, surgical, diagnostic, and patient care devices worldwide. The company offers vascular products, such as percutaneous transluminal angioplasty catheters, chronic total occlusion catheters, guidewires, fabrics, meshes, introducers, and accessories; valvuloplasty balloons; peripheral vascular stents, self-expanding and balloon-expandable covered stents, and vascular grafts; vena cava filters; biopsy devices; and temporary pacing electrode catheters for the treatment of peripheral vascular disease and heart arrhythmias. It also provides urology products, including Foley catheters to reduce the rate of urinary tract infections; fecal incontinence products; brachytherapy devices and radioactive seeds for the treatment of prostate cancer; intermittent urinary drainage catheters, and urine monitoring and collection systems; ureteral stents; specialty devices for stone removal procedures; surgical slings and pelvic floor repair products; catheter stabilization devices; and products for therapeutic hypothermia. In addition, the company offers oncology products that include specialty vascular access catheters and ports, vascular access ultrasound devices, dialysis access catheters, and enteral feeding devices to treat and manage various cancers, and other diseases and disorders.
They're probably waiting for sales to spike, and if / when that happens we could see covering. I don't think they believe in the buyout scenario. Neither do a lot of longs.
The question is, why do YOU insist on making statements like "brachytherapy using C131 is the MOST EFFICIENT way of curing cancer, it beats ALL TREATMENTS, and it can be used on ALL CANCERS?" Rudy, stop it. You're embarrassing yourself. Really.
You don't know which way is up. My comment to you had nothing to do with money, and concerning making it, most of the longs here are underwater and are scratching their heads asking, "why?" Keep up the good work, uww. You do the board proud.
One would think that an investor who's been here since $0.42 would know something about the science and the market and could offer more to the board than just clown comments. Goes to show that intelligence is not really necessary to play on Wall Street. Keep up the good work, uww.
This report actually mentioned IsoRay by name and the litigation against the company. Also that Gliomas, the common form of brain cancer, are not treatable. That's fair. If they want to promote the treatment but also keep the message balanced, go for it.
Put on your glasses, Rudy, and let's get this straight. I bash the stock and the company's questionable marketing and promotion tactics to induce investors to buy shares, not the value of the product to help save lives.
You said I've commented that Cs-131 was ineffective, but you can't point to anything in my history that confirms that because I never said it. In fact, Cesium IS more costly, and in fact, it IS old technology. Those points are argued only by pumpers.
There is a long list of effective treatments that save lives, and I've said that Cesium and Iodine are both effective. It's in the record. You refer to the science, but when the study outcomes are discussed in detail, and their impact in the market, you can't understand why ISR gets beaten up all the time for not performing, and why it's become a trading vehicle rather than a long term investment vehicle.
Your comment that I-125 is junk and should be banned is ridiculous. Do you know how absurd that sounds? You have no idea what's involved in making treatment decisions and predicting outcomes in an individual case. I don't work for anyone and you shouldn't invest in technology and markets you don't understand.