Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 2:34 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed for Christmas


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Volcano Corporation (VOLC) Message Board

green_side_up 39 posts  |  Last Activity: Dec 8, 2014 9:29 AM Member since: Nov 2, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • green_side_up green_side_up Oct 31, 2014 2:30 PM Flag

    look harder

  • Backed by new investors, including The Baupost Group, run by investor guru Seth Klarmin. PRTK's technology focuses on drug resistance and their lead candidate is for ABSSI heading to Phase 3 trials. So, likely more competition for CTIX's new wonder drug antibiotic (although, remember, we won't see Phase 2 trial data until April 2015).

    Let's see if CTIX can get some real institutional capital that they will need to run these 5 multi-site, blinded trials. That's highly unlikely to be enough capital if these trials are run correctly. No institutional capital is knocking on the CTIX door, nor are any large bio/pharma partners, so it will be interesting to see what happens with this shelf filing. No up-listing either, which would allow institutions to purchase the stock and provide a natural distribution for new shares...most are restricted from buying OTC shares.

    Good news:, at least CTIX has a new COO who is willing to follow the Leo script of producing super excited press releases. Yeah!

    No reason to buy shares,

    Sentiment: Hold

  • green_side_up green_side_up Oct 24, 2014 9:29 AM Flag

    The problem is the Phase 2 data for BRIL was releasedj prior to bankruptcy, so the news was in the public domain already. I just don't see the team at CBST not seeing this data. There are not that many antibiotic drugs in development (one of the problems, especially with drug resistance on the rise). It just seems extraordinarily odd to me. Cancer drug development is an entire different ball of wax...there are hundreds of companies in that field, but a relatively small number of antibiotic / vaccine companies...especially public ones.

    On the point, of risk on an acquisition, the purchase price of the PolyMedix assets were very not much dollars at risk. And, even while public, the company's stock did not rally on the exact same Phase 2 data news that CTIX just released - the press releases are almost identical - you wonder if CTIX did any real work or just waited a few months to re-iterate the same data.

    Let's put it this way, if you are being objective, it's hard to trust that this situation passes the smell test.

  • Reply to

    Where is the P-Value stats?

    by green_side_up Oct 23, 2014 12:45 PM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 23, 2014 12:59 PM Flag

    That is the stupidest response ever and Leo has a fiduciary duty to disclose the data. The likelihood is the data has issues.

  • green_side_up by green_side_up Oct 23, 2014 12:45 PM Flag

    This is why Leo sucks...we have no trial statistics...CTIX says the drug met the primary endpoint but they don't provide a P-Value for statistical significance. That is unacceptable. Shareholders should DEMAND that info and not have to wait until late April 2015 to get details. I wouldn't be surprised if Adam Feurestein of The Street comes up with an article about the lack of data in the Press Release.

    I'm long 5,000 shares and want to buy more, but without statistical data, I struggle to have any confidence in CTIX leadership.

  • Reply to

    Any Ideas on what it will take for

    by trader4567 Oct 20, 2014 12:28 AM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 21, 2014 7:15 PM Flag

    ...solution from tissue capture, cancer identification, cancer treatment and cancer monitoring. The question will be what will FMI do in this liquid biopsy market...can they create a comprehensive liquid biopsy test like it has in the tissue market, or will it develop a multitude of tests. We don't know a lot about the strategy, but if FMI can somehow aggregate the liquid biopsy testing data along with its tissue biopsy data, to provide a comprehensive, end-to-end database of cancer testing data...that could be the Holy Grail.

  • Reply to

    Any Ideas on what it will take for

    by trader4567 Oct 20, 2014 12:28 AM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 21, 2014 7:08 PM Flag

    I think it can become a $5 Billion company with its current system / platform as more physicians / oncology groups ramp their use. The Big Data they are aggregating from all of these tests will become extremely valuable and will change the standard of care. Soon, FoundationOne will be used as a first line defense towards cancer treatment and drug development. The reimbursement of Priority Health is the first step towards this. The key differential is that unlike single-assay firms like, FMI has developed a complete picture of cancer genomics from the tissue. A single assay DOES NOT provide a complete picture of what is going on with the patient. Sure, that particular gene may be enough to provide good treatment, but why run the risk that you are missing something. A person's cancer tissue may show gene alteration or over expression for more than what that single assay tests for. Hence, FMI is the best positioned diagnostic firm in the it needs to execute and expand its testing, drug development and utilization of its platform.

    To increase the valuation beyond the above, FMI needs to expand into liquid biopsy. And, I would expect FMI to announce its game plan / initiative into the liquid biopsy market soon, as it has discussed this market in presentations. Tissue-based testing itself is great if you can remove tissue, but its not good for those cases where getting to the cancer tissue is hard, and it is not good in terms of monitoring the cancer post surgery or treatment. Using sophisticated capture technology, some firms, like Biocept (BIOC), are already working with tissue-based companies to capture tissue cancer biomarkers in the blood. BIOC announced a deal with Rosetta Genomics (ROSG) which develops single-based tissue tests in the microRNA field. Other tissue-based testing firms will follow, whether they sign deals with BIOC or other liquid biopsy firms...this is inevitable. Testing firms will want to provide an end-to-end...

  • green_side_up by green_side_up Oct 17, 2014 12:07 PM Flag

    XON continues to be technically very weak. The one strong day we saw in the market sell-off has proven to be an anomaly and another opportunity for the shorts to add to positions. Massive short interest is in full control as they view any justification of market cap to be dependent on earnings that could be years away. Despite an extremely impressive of portfolio assets and a limitless future pipeline, the Shorts are willing to press. The chart on XON is UGLY...draw a line diagonally right from the top of the post-IPO high and XON is going to re-test recent lows barring any material news or significant additional insider / institutional buying.

    Today's action is quite Bearish.

  • Reply to

    What are the IBIO economics in Caliber deal?

    by green_side_up Oct 17, 2014 10:12 AM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 17, 2014 10:24 AM Flag

    I think the economics are not what everyone thinks they will be. No royalty rate is disclosed in the 10-K

  • Do any of you LONGS really know?

    How much is the license fee?

    Is there any back-end economics tied to volume that goes to IBIO or does all / most of the revenue go to Caliber?

  • Reply to

    Odd Positive Price Action

    by luckytrufflepig Oct 15, 2014 8:09 PM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 16, 2014 12:07 PM Flag

    No follow-through yet today....chart still diagonally negative going back to post IPO high. Need a move up on big volume and a real break of this downtrend...and then XON will move significantly given the HUGE short interest...but right now, the shorts are still in control, even though XON has had good relative outperformance in the past couple of days.

  • Reply to

    Bill Miller pounds the table on XON

    by rational1_2000 Oct 13, 2014 10:02 AM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 13, 2014 10:43 AM Flag

    Bill Miller had a chance to lay out the bullish case and came across as an idiot. Worst case lose 1/2 your money, bet on CEO. Is this really his due diligence effort? I mean, what a wasted opportunity to explain what XON is really doing. Talk about a massive blunder. Nice reaction today to his thesis. I'm #$%$ at him. Herb Greenberg of CNBC did a better job. Dan Loeb did a night-and-day better job. Miller sounded uneducated. Sure hope he is more eloquent going forward.

  • green_side_up green_side_up Oct 10, 2014 4:01 PM Flag

    Shorts seem to be outmuscling Kirk, MIller and Loeb...down 50% from post-IPO high to just above IPO price.

  • green_side_up by green_side_up Oct 9, 2014 11:04 AM Flag

    Low volume selling continues...down over 5% on 185,000 shares. Almost back to the IPO price. Shorts winning, Bill Miller and Dan Loeb losing.

  • green_side_up by green_side_up Oct 8, 2014 5:12 PM Flag

    Seems like nobody likes XON on huge market up days in 2014. All that fund money going into companies leveraged to the global economy, expecting the FED to keep interest rates low. The smart money is going to add on these dips...they know the incredible upside of XON. The stock chart looks awful...diagonally down from the post IPO the shorts have taken advantage of the lack of earnings and the lack of cross-the-board buyers. However, with underlying investors like Dan Loeb and Bill Miller, along with Kirk's fund, any significant news, such as expansion of the J&J partnership, another big company partnership or a material acquisitition, should send XON gapping higher. ECC news with small firms like Histogenics are XON builds a portfolio of equity owned, development stage partnerships...but they are unlikely to material move the stock until developments from any of these portfolio firms announce news related to XON's technology.


  • Reply to

    The Real Value of Intrexon

    by theceprogrammer Sep 23, 2014 7:19 PM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 2, 2014 8:56 PM Flag

    The point of this list was to get the correct ownership of the number of shares of XON's ECC partners, as there is usually (though not always) an equity component to these deals...especially with the smaller cap companies. My point was that HALO is not an ECC partner of XON's. And, the fact that Kirk's fund owns the HALO shares has zero bearing on the valuation of XON. So, i was telling theceprogrammer to review his work.

  • "The progress achieved under our initial ECC led to this expansion of our combined efforts."

    That's clearly an endorsement of XON's technology platform.

    Amazing how this stock has been sold off. Funds have only been interested in large cap, dividend stocks, and not story stocks like XON with positive EPS several years out.

    Long-term investors have to take advantage of these opportunities. XON is back to the IPO range despite a lot of positive developments, including the energy business, new ECC's, and continued momentum in existing ECC partner development.

    If even ONE of the ECC deals works out, it justifies the current valuation.

    Guys like Dan Loeb and Bill Miller, two of the best investors of the past 25 years, own stock and are very bullish long-term. They will be adding to positions on any further weakness.


    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    The Real Value of Intrexon

    by theceprogrammer Sep 23, 2014 7:19 PM
    green_side_up green_side_up Oct 2, 2014 11:37 AM Flag

    Don't think your shares / stocks are correct here. For example, I think Kirk's fund owns HALO, not Intrexon. Maybe review this again via XON's public filings.

17.95+0.02(+0.11%)Dec 24 1:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.