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

Volcano Corporation Message Board

jacosa 100 posts  |  Last Activity: 3 hours ago Member since: Jan 24, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Buy the DIPS

    by mrdtino Jul 29, 2015 9:44 AM

    Buy siders assume that an unexpectedly late CC means trouble. Could be books that won't balance, an unexpected shortfall, management confusion. And if any of those is happening, it's better for owners if management DOES delay the call. Here we have a possibility of management distraction/confusion (it's ALWAYS possible, and if it happens, well, we've been there in the past). We also have a possibility of external events that management would like to comment on without the fuss of a separate release/meeting (I mostly refer to the Chicago abstracts).

  • Reply to

    what happened? anyone! thanks

    by willfirst888 10 hours ago

    Lots of non-serious contributors, but mostly I think that buy-side analysts have looked at what might come out at next Tuesday's CC and come up with nothing that translates into cash near-term. Inventory oscillations in Jakafi have been damped over the year, but the recent quarter was likely an inventory-depleting one. It's unlikely Incyte will generate excitement with the title of an abstract for the ASH hem-onc meeting, but all too likely that one might suggest an eventual threat to Incyte's business.

    Remember: no news is good news for Janus 1, but to an analyst it just looks like no news. The Merck collaboration looks promising, but Incyte has no control of when news comes out (there should be a go/no decision by the next CC).

    It's rather frustrating that Jakavi looks like a well-launched product and still only maybe a quarter of the landmarks have been paid.

    Big non-serious issue is that the historic "bad conference call" was an August one.

  • Reply to

    Buy the DIPS

    by mrdtino Jul 29, 2015 9:44 AM

    I thought I was joking about analysts being surprised that the CC wasn't today. Why else would INCY drop sharply at the open?

  • jacosa jacosa Jul 29, 2015 7:44 PM Flag

    Just reiterated that it won'tbe so late they get delisted

  • Reply to

    Buy the DIPS

    by mrdtino Jul 29, 2015 9:44 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 29, 2015 4:24 PM Flag

    Appears to trade in London, no US analyst coverage. I don't see ADRs, but apparently there's a thin private market in the foreign stock. That sounds like a pretty good case for leaving it alone.

    A Chinese domiciled drug developer looking at the same sorts of diseases as US developers target sounds like a good idea. One presumes government backing, which would make trials easier to enroll [snort]. I doubt that FDA (Or EMA) would license anything based exclusively on Chinese pivotal studies; you make money selling drugs in US/Canada and EU, so that advantage is diluted. They talk big about the Chinese health care market, but I'll have to see it for a while before I believe in it.

    Their blurb is the first mention I've seen of Yet Another 'ome' (kinome--the universe of all kinases). The similarity of the drug targets that they're addressing to those addressed by Incyte is pretty striking. From their boasting, I figure that they have about 30 drug candidates and they talk about something like 8, so they seem to be more talkative than is typical for the industry

  • Reply to

    Buy the DIPS

    by mrdtino Jul 29, 2015 9:44 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 29, 2015 12:57 PM Flag

    Was that Daly, soozanie?

    From the list of elements of the bear case that I posted a while back, the two that I consider worth watching are ability to fund an ever-growing clinical trials program and the low stock ownership by management. I expect to hear a lot in the next few CCs about least-dilutive funding of clinical trials (remember the 3-legged stool: debt, paid-in capital and retained earnings. Only the third is non-dilutive, and it's very hard to make it conform to your other plans). I'd really like to see a broad-based way for existing owners to pay in more capital on favorable terms.

    What I don't expect to hear mentioned voluntarily is that the whole range of incentive compensation of executives [which cuts the drive to own stock] seems to be getting awfully generous. That may be a good thing; since AT LEAST the 1970s, disproportionate channeling of money to top management and their friends has been the norm in US corporations. I won't do a long essay on the dodges used, but you know them. Incyte is being unusually public about it. I hope there will be some analyst questions.

    Other than that, I wonder how much of today's drop is caused by analysts waking up, checking what time to schedule the CC tomorrow, not seeing it, and going nuts {"An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?")

  • Reply to

    $108.54 close ,Right at major support

    by bonkenx Jul 24, 2015 4:03 PM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 25, 2015 1:30 PM Flag

    It's possible that we've already seen all the tightening we're going to before YE (increased reserve requirement for systemically critical financials), Economy just isn't very robust right now. News on housing is mixed.

    And again, rising rates matter more the farther into the future the cash part of your value proposition is. INCY has both near and far, but most of the issues that people pay attention to become money 1.5-2 years out (Bari, the IDO inhibitor).

  • Reply to

    $108.54 close ,Right at major support

    by bonkenx Jul 24, 2015 4:03 PM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 24, 2015 4:31 PM Flag

    He didn't even mention Bari, nor did he mention the bromodomain modifier which looks like the most interesting of the barely-clinical pipeline.

  • Reply to

    Anemic day 3

    by mrdtino Jul 23, 2015 12:27 PM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 24, 2015 11:29 AM Flag

    Remember: the "bad conference call" was August (3 years ago?). It's like the stock market in October in years ending with '7' or '9.' No good reason, but you're extra cautious.

    Remember what went wrong: top management on the call were tired and distracted, they were caught transparently lowballing the earnings forecast and little bits of the "dark pipeline" leaked [really, in retrospect, very little].

    So yeah, I'd like to hear next Thursday, but if this EoQ accounting figures to tire the guys who'll speak, or if somebody has a travel conflict, that would be enough reason to wait until after the weekend. News? It's possible It's possible that they want to let anybody else's news come out before the CC, too.

  • I was scanning for upcoming events and found a new biggie. First ASH meeting on hematologic malignancies, Sept 17-19. Mostly a series of "How I Treat..." presentations by big names (MF presentation by Reuben Mesa, who seems to be unique in getting along with everybody). Some room in the program for breaking news. Abstract submitters to be notified by August 1, so titles may be released soon afterward. The example abstract is full-poster-sized (and incidentally a 2010 Ruxo poster), so I doubt that abstracts will be published before the meeting starts. To attract business to this meeting, ASH will allow material presented at it to be the basis of national meeting (Dec) presentations.

    Really wild speculation: the Aug CC is a tad late this year. Might they be anxious to mention abstracts accepted for this meeting?

  • jacosa jacosa Jul 21, 2015 11:53 AM Flag

    Sure enough--I missed this before (I said in the 68% increase item that I would look at this)--RESPONSE:

    Enrollment: 222
    Study Start Date: October 2010
    Estimated Study Completion Date: December 2018
    Primary Completion Date: January 2014 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

    Nominal life expectancy after a diagnosis of PV is 20 years, so the full 8-year study is long enough to pick up a survival signal (not to mention progression to MF or AML).

    Sure, my constant refrain is that an investment time frame is about 18 months, but this has some interesting features. First: the earliest date when that telomerase inhibitor could hit the market is 2018, and even then they wouldn't be able to claim a survival benefit. Second: there's a [relatively] large and easy market for indolent and mild MF, and a significant decrease in transitions to MF in this group could help in attacking that market.

  • Reply to

    Jakavi (USD 98 million, +68% cc),

    by viseslinger Jul 21, 2015 5:46 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 21, 2015 11:00 AM Flag

    To complete the reversal...a 68% YoY increase for Jakavi at this stage of its rollout is not a big deal.

    However, I'm going to take a look at the trial description of RESPONSE. The ongoing extension could be real interesting if it continues long enough.

  • jacosa by jacosa Jul 18, 2015 2:17 PM Flag

    I can't, for the life of me, come up with a likely business development that would raise the stock price after the CC three weeks away. Too soon for the 3rd Lilly p3, no good reason for Jakafi sales to surprise and we're past the stage at which milestone payments are a big deal. Anything about divisionalization is more likely to scare investors than please them. It's still kind of early for any of the little p2s to report anything, and as for Janus 1, no news is good news (but not very exciting).

    It isn't management's business to raise the stock price short-term (much talk I see on message boards to the contrary) but they know WE like it, and they generally seem inclined to do it if convenient.

    The stock price is too high for casual investors. A split would increase the possible buyer pool, on the other hand it would be seen as a gesture against acquisition (an acquirer doesn't care what each individual share costs, only the total). And even though management doesn't seem to want to encourage a take-out, the possibility clearly boosts the stock price.

    And I remain concerned about covering a possible explosion of registration studies (especially if Lilly decides to take Bari against nephropathy).

    I, personally, like the idea of a split with attached rights. Say 2 for 1 and each old share gets half an 18 month right to purchase at an effective price around 125? Should put the new stock in the 40s, raises capital with a relatively harmless kind of dilution (and only if company is doing well). Wouldn't delight a buyer, but the lowish exercise price makes the accounting straightforward. While such rights might lose value fast if Incyte hits a speed bump, the associated "undilution" would protect holders of the entire package.

  • Reply to

    Don't automatically believe it's me

    by jacosa Jul 17, 2015 10:50 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 18, 2015 1:37 PM Flag

    Ok, it's over. Tentatively, some local jokers who wanted to be able to send mail as me, to other locals. Yeah, I hang out with people who think that would be least when they're drunk. I'm putting up a new topic that ought to pass muster for style.

  • Reply to

    Obviously a horrendous management debacle but...

    by apemn88 Jul 16, 2015 2:16 PM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 18, 2015 12:51 PM Flag

    That's kind of what the problem was about. Standard scam: if you have assets at risk of being found worthless, sell them to a dummy company, buy the dummy company and carry it at purchase price. If the worst doesn't happen, re-absorb it. If the worst DOES happen, you can hope to find a good time to recognize the 'asset impairment.' One obvious problem for Crediamigo is that people sometimes leave their jobs, and in Mexico's "less formal" society it's difficult and expensive to collect on loans that were supposed to be backed by their ongoing paychecks.

    This time, the lawsuits against The Board probably go forward. The stock is cheap whenever the second board member is banned from the securities industry, or a mechanism is set up to protect the majority of owners from capricious behavior by the class B owner. (I'd look to the Tribunes of the Roman Senate)

    Pawn is a great business, and so long as you watch credit quality, PDL isn't bad. National QA on your stores can be turned into an advantage. But institutionally, EZ lost track of what business it was in.

  • Someone has been trying to reset my Yahoo password. I attract a certain number of kooks, one species of which might post here. If it isn't my style, it probably isn't me.

  • Reply to

    Mini squueeeezee today

    by newtwo99 Jul 17, 2015 9:29 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 17, 2015 10:26 AM Flag

    For a single order, that's big, but MYGN volume has been running generally high. This is the same order of magnitude as the run-up-Friday-to-generate-skeptics-Monday trade I remarked on. We may get some sort of read on amount of stock in weak hands, but that big short position is unlikely to be swayed.

  • Reply to

    Bear case

    by jacosa Jul 9, 2015 11:24 AM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 16, 2015 12:57 PM Flag

    The most optimistic Geron fans don't have a realistic way Imetelstat could reach market before 2018 (looked at with average optimism, 2020 seems more plausible). In an investment sense, that is no threat.

    The Geron hyper-bull case assumes that Jakafi is so ineffective that FDA would perceive that there was no existing treatment for myelofibrosis, and that myelofibrosis was an unusually terrible disease, and clear away many procedural requirements. Neither of these preconditions seems likely.

    If Incyte is still as dependent on Jakafi for MF in 2019 as it is today, that is already a serious failure.

  • BoA/ML just issued a summary of pre-earnings opinions for the Life Science sector, over the signature of Derik de Bruin (I consider him an 'average' analyst). He expects MYGN to slightly beat management guidance (upper part of analysts' forecast range). His price target is $35, a discount to the sector, because of business complexities and the risk of further litigation.

    I'll say what I think closer to the event, as will, I'm sure, a bear or two.

  • Reply to

    What to look for in a Prolaris LCD

    by jacosa Jul 15, 2015 3:10 PM
    jacosa jacosa Jul 15, 2015 10:36 PM Flag

    A Gleason score is a numerical summary of the most important (by experience) features of a pathology report. No separate test (although I presume the minimal bookkeeping involved gets charged for). It's a case of what chemists call "A Pauling point." (the reference is mostly to Linus Pauling's concept of electronegativity). It is an easy number to get, and to do better you have to work A Lot harder. The problem with restricting Prolaris by Gleason score is that if you did an aggressiveness vs Gleason score plot (only possible retrospectively), the scatter would be huge. A modest cutoff consigns many men with non-aggressive cancers to definitive treatment.

    I have to say this some time. At 67, I've lost the usual sort of number of friends and family to cancer. About half of them, though, actually died from secondary cancers apparently caused by radiation treatments. Cancer treatment is not benign.