Not true. The calls being purchased for August are $32, $34, and $37. Not seeing much at $34.50. At least not for August anyway.
The company has said no such thing. Chris G had stated they were not actively pursuing a partnership for etep, but that they were willing to listen to offers. Also, we have new management now. We have no idea what they think about a partnership as they've never stated anything one way or another.
The call buying has continued throughout the day. If this was 2014, I wouldn't make much of it. But the 2015 call buyers have been right nearly every time.
Definitely a nice move, but not a longterm hold. Their data release was suspect at best. Only releasing data on 1/3 of patients? That's sketchy. Reputable biotechs don't do that. In other words, just be sure to protect your profits. Just my opinion.
Wrong. Just because a stock goes up after being down for several days doesn't mean squat. It's nice to see, but your constant pumping about leaks is silly.
Most are in the money, but still indicates that we should continue to expect upward movement in the near term.
Also, where are all of the people whining about the price last week?
No. Two boys went non-ambulatory shortly after the trial started. Two boys began to noticeably decline at the last update. The issue is that eteplirsen can only do so much with muscles that are already damaged. So I won't be surprised if all of the boys eventually end up non-ambulatory. To date, however, eteplirsen seems to have done a remarkable job of keeping muscles with little to no deterioration healthy (i.e., upper body including heart).
Eteplirsen is not a cure; nor has it ever been one. But the earlier the boys begin receiving it, the better their chances for a long life.
Definitely a possibility that there are 1-2 new non-ambulatory boys, but the spin on this being similar to natural history is just flat out false. Even if this is the case, they have done much better than the natural history of DMD suggests.
Of course I know the difference. I presume that you are aware of these things:
1. An effective vaccine greatly reduces the urgency for finding a curative treatment because it will prevent widespread outbreaks.
2. Sarepta's Ebola treatment--despite the company making it widely known its current supply was available for testing--was never tested, and the government expressed no interest in doing so.
3. Sarepta's Ebola treatment is very expensive to make.
4. There are several other companies with treatments already being tested.
So knowing these things, a quick yes or no question for you or anyone insistent on believing SRPT will make money from Ebola:
Will Sarepta's Ebola treatment produce profit for the company?
Sarepta has incredible potential, but Ebola won't be part of its platform. Email management and ask them if you need verification.
For those who doubted the effectiveness of the Ebola vaccines being tested in Liberia, now you know. (As I pointed out in a different thread--and which subsequently led me to being attacked--it wasn't coincidence that the amount of Ebola cases in Liberia dropped to nearly 0 just months after the vaccines were started there.) Can we please stop the Ebola talk now?
Agreed. But they aren't the only ones on the prowl. So are AGN and HZNP. Quite a few others are hunting as well, but not as aggressively.