Any contract of this type can be voided if Baxter simply offers what MACK management views as the right price. Right now, MACK management is likely right that they are undervalued taking into account the totality of their pipeline.
Usually, i pay attention to the PT's of respectable analysts but in this case i think there is more upside than the PT's suggest. For example, i think MM-398 will become the default second line therapy for pancreatic cancer - and i think the revenue from this could be substantial since so many pancreatic cancer cases worsen to the point of needing second line therapy. I also think MM-398 will prove efficacious in other indications and possibly first line. And i think the rest of the portfolio is underappreciated including obviously MM-121. This might be a case where all the PT's shift up or MACK just gets taken out by BAXTER for over 20 once MM-398 launches.
Yeah - the sale was immaterial for Weiss. He continues to hold shares currently valued at $133 M. And he wants that stake to be at a minimum twice that before he parts with the remainder (IMHO)
MM-302 - Reviewed phase 1 data (greatest activity in anthracycline-naive patients) and the trial design of
HERMIONE (potentially registrational; this is known).
MM-121 a key priority: The prioritization of MM-121 does not come as a surprise, in our view, given competitive drug development dynamics in use of the heregulin biomarker. Of note, the prior Sanofi agreement has ended. The focus of MM-121 development will be (all expected to initiate 2015): 1) combination with paclitaxel in HRG+ ER/PR-, HER2- metastatic breast cancer, 2) combination with chemotherapy in HRG+ triple negative breast cancer, and 3) combination with docetaxel/pemetrexed in HRG+ EGRF wild-type NSCLC. Interestingly, Merrimack noted it would be prepared to move forward with initial clinical trials without a new partner
Highlights for Merrimack’s (MACK) analyst day:
The MM-398 NDA is on-track to be completed by end-1Q15/early-2Q15. Merrimack highlighted the unmet need in pancreatic cancer (6% OS at 5 years; no consensus in later-line treatment) and reviewed known phase 3 NAPOLI-1 results. Interestingly, market research highlighted 97% of physicians view MM-398 clinical profile as “superior/equivalent” to current post- gemcitabine (gem) therapies (60% superior). Of note,
related to the active comparator arm of 5#$%$/LV in the NAPOLI-1 trial, our sense is Merrimack is NOT receiving push back in either the academic or community setting. On the commercial side, the pancreatic market is concentrated with 40 hospital referral regions accounting for 80% of treated patients.
Hence, the field team will be fewer than 50 individuals (regional field managers being hired now). On the reimbursement side, MM-398 will be covered under the medical benefit and prior authorization is likely. Merrimack noted ~19K addressable patients in the post-gem setting (#s unchanged from prior presentations) and highlighted therapeutic treatment in the later-lines of therapy is growing. We estimate WW global peak MM-398 sales of $550-600M.
Clinical development updates for MM-398 and MM-302: MM-398 – Merrimack highlighted front-line pancreatic cancer and HER2-negative (HER2-) gastric cancer as development priorities (both to start in 2015). In phase 2/3 front-line pancreatic study, the phase 2 portion will assess multiple mechanism based regimens and there is investigator interest in potentially exploring a FOLFIRNOX type of regimen, given the favorable safety/tolerability of MM-398+5FU/LV. The phase 3 trial will use an Abraxane-gem comparator. In gastric cancer, an initial study will build off the MM-398+5FU/LV backbone and compare to regional standard of care. Our model does not include MM-398 front-line pancreatic cancer or HER2- gastric cancer. (to be continued)
i dunno - i went into level II just now and there are a large number of asks lining up for each bid, meaning that someone is selling. But you may be right nonetheless
i agree - can't be the reason, in my view. But as i posted previously, if it goes below 15, i'll buy more
T & A or just TA? Just kidding. I still think that it's just some focused selling by a few holders that are securing profits and maybe keeping funds available for the next darling biotech (such as JUNO). I was on Level II today watching the action - the bids would go lower, and then you'd see 5-7 asks appear about 4-5 cents higher than the bid, then a trade would occur, the bid would go a bit lower and the asks would line up in the same fashion. So the seller or seller were there in a focused way.
If the stock continues to be weak and goes below 15, i'll buy more, even though i already have alot and have held for what will be a year at the end of January.
i'm agnostic on this type of thing. whenever a stock i own is under sustained pressure, i try to assess whether there is a fundamental reason for the weakness. if i cannot find a fundamental reason, then i hold unless i think the overall market is incredibly bad (as in 2008/09) and that it might make sense to go to the sidelines while the market craters and then buy back in later. In this particular case, i plan to hold.
In level II, the ask quotes keep coming even as the price declines, showing a willingness to sell at the lower prices. For example, usually 6 or so ask quotes just a bit above the lowest bid
i went into Level II to see how the bid/ask action is presenting. There is a steady stream of ask quotes at the lower prices as the price declines. In other words, the ask quotes are not drying up - in fact, they are numerous - as the price declines. This suggests that there are some steady, focused sellers out there. Not sure why - as i see this as strong on a fundamental basis - but this is what is is and don't think we have bottomed yet.
Then it's possible the pps could languish until ASCO. if the pps goes below 15, i'll likely buy more (even though i already own alot)
i'm not aware of a fundamental reason for the weakness so i'm taking this in stride. I think it reflects profit taking after the recent run up and in view of less expectation of a deal (acquisition or partnership) in the near term. Personally, I think that a deal could happen in the near term but I don't expect it. I think that post-ASCO next year is more likely.
i agree - Weiss will try to keep expenses down, try to avoid a secondary that would dilute his own large equity stake and seek a buyout at the right price (no sooner than mid- 2015, after ASCO)
I think there has been some focused profit taking after our recent rally - but nothing fundamentally has changed from what I can see
of course, if you are rituxan-refractory, as many patients become, then it has alot more than marginal value. This is oncology - the standard of care evolves and doctors prescribe accordingly, because lives are at stake