There's a Hapten Sciences in TN...Then a Hapten Pharmaceuticals LLC in NY? Whatever...It's all total nonsense. You have a company searching for a viable drug to possibly build a company around that is so bizzare it's insane. An RNAi company that is now developing a drug that is not RNAi related? This company has no idea where it is going or what will work, or how to fund it...Nothing. Just hanging on by a thread and trying to keep some type of paychecks coming in. Worst company I ever invested in. Out and gone with a nice fat loss, and good luck to whomever is still left in this sinking ship....
What are you talking about? Can you people not think for yourselves and read between the lines here...
Company is picking up some random Phase 2 "compound" from some random biotech for an undisclosed
up front payment in "cash" and "common stock"? How much in cash? The stock will be dilutive.
Read between the lines and it basically says.... "We don't think our current compounds can get out of
clinical trials for at least 5 more years at best, and we need something to attract investor interest in the interim
or we can't keep issuing stock, and we'lll go bust..." Wish I had never ever heard of this friggin BS company
and it's idiot CEO...
John....Dang I missed SNTS but I do have MGNX from the low 18's...lol... What a year in the bios!
Got a gamble going on now witha a data event for CNAT before the end of the year. Do you know anything about them...good...bad...or get the heck out??? LOL Wake me up when CEMP hits 30.....Cheers to all
longs and God help the shorts!
I'm long but don't like the action in advance of some major clinical news....If you're of the school that "news leaks" like I am, I'd like to see the stock up today, rather than down....GLTAL's
Hanna... I agree 100% on everything you just posted. I do think that the surgical scar market could be huge if
we truly have a product that can make a scar virtually become unseen, or even close to it. When 90%
of the observing group points to our treated group as clearly having the better observable scar, then
we may well have something very important to market down the road...
Yes it was Hanna.. Very concise and informative. Said exactly what I stated in three earlier posts I made here on the issue. P values are a friggin joke when efficacy is established by visual means. The product/drug is designed to materially decrease the visability of surgical scars. It either does that, or it doesn't. This is not rocket science as far as evaluating the efficacy, ie, the results of the treatment(s). Insurance may not cover this type of treatment to begin with if they consider it purely cosmetic rather than medically necessary. If it is
only marginally better than re-section by itself, there is no way they're going to cover it. But at least if the
results are spectacular, patients will likely use and pay for it regardless.
Right here and long huge from $18.75... Lovin the action but can't explain it today except possibly Shire may be surfacing as a buyout candidate. Yesterday it was NPSP...lol!
Come on gang. We're not dealing with a new drug that people are unsure whether it works or not.
"P" values?...lol...Stat significance. Great when you're dealing the the effects of a drug that you cannot
view internally as working or not. Here you can SEE whether it is working or not. "P" values when your
control measure is a bunch of people looking at a scar and forming an opinion which scar looks better...
the treated or non treated group? What the FDA will care about is whether the drug is doing any damage or harm to the patients. Safety. Both over the short term and the long term.,,,, As far as efficacy...You can either see that or not.
No sense doing the secondary until the stock is at least 5 pts higher IMHO... TTPHnow $38 this morning and basically has double plused after releasing trial results less than a year ago. We are very undervalued right now so hopefully they wait a bit before doing a secondary.
biotechnician...First of all I am long large RXII and sitting on a nice loss from last year as well...
The term "sustained effect" is NOT a clinical or medical term of art. "Sustained reduction in scar
severity" is obviously plain English, concise, and should have been repeated in this PR. Sustained
effect connotes nothing really. What effect were they refering to...? The lack of "effect" in the one
month pictures or the better "effect" at three months?
Sustained "reduction" means continuing reduction is scar size, shape or visability. Sustained "effect" means something very different, and the term was chosen very carefully by them...make no mistake about that.
IMHO they were trying to impart that although the effect of the drug was continuing...perhaps even flattening or reshaping the scar to some degree, it was not reducing it's over all "size". IMHO...
The basic difference between the antibiotics of TTPH and CEMP is that the TTPH antibiotic was designed to basically treat gram negative bacterias, whereas Soli from CEMP can be used in both gram positive and gram negative bacterias. Based on the price differentials from both companies we have at least 700 million in catch up value to make up once positive Phase 3 trial results are released....