Mon, Nov 24, 2014, 8:55 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed


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

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated Message Board

jksnnh 32 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 26, 2013 8:00 PM Member since: Oct 18, 2009
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Based on the data tonight, the Phase 3 trial 600mg QD arm will be statistically and clinically relevant when all is said and done. treating 15,000 CF patients at $300k per year is $4.5B in unencumbered revenue in my book. Once VRTX emerges as an "orphan" company with that revenue stream and finally afforded an orphan premium (5-10x revenues), we are looking at a $25-30B market cap company easily. between now and then the street will slowly catch up to this realization and take vertex out of this hep c dominated penalty box of a valuation they currently sit in.

  • Reply to

    What is moving the stock today?

    by qdelfan Aug 6, 2012 11:38 AM
    jksnnh jksnnh Aug 9, 2012 9:35 PM Flag

    Lazard apparently initiated with a buy rating but the analyst chose to focus on (overvalue) the HCV pipeline and overlook or dismiss CF. He has it completely wrong and should do just the opposite

  • Reply to

    DELISTING + BANKRUPTCY within 12-18 Months

    by toppick63 Nov 25, 2011 11:05 AM
    jksnnh jksnnh Nov 25, 2011 4:28 PM Flag

    you'll be squeezed soon, mark my words!!

  • stock was halted before announcement. label was clean and should render strong uptake. shorts are in trouble, esp at current $85M market cap.

    happy t day!

  • TSPT decides its worth it to fund the trials for Intermezzo in which case its more capital required and further dilution to us.


    it decides to scrap the product entirely, and focus on pipeline? either way i see it heading further south. there could be a better point at which to enter. but until then, might as well make some coin on the drift down.

  • its clear FDA wanted a study to look at the inadvertent dosing and whether the new packaging would reduce this risk, not just some explanation from a biotech company as to why they should not do the study.

  • Reply to

    Rejection PPS?

    by nicholasfalbo Jul 12, 2011 10:12 AM
    jksnnh jksnnh Jul 12, 2011 7:10 PM Flag

    it goes to cash or $4.5 /share upon non-approval

  • Did TSPT address the fda's concern of inadvertent dosing? I understand TSPT provided a rationale as to why such a study would not be useful, but did FDA agree to that??

  • Only the cash they have on hand, or less, b/c that will go away

  • Reply to

    This is why shorts have to cover before EOD:

    by rodaytrade Jun 2, 2011 12:12 PM
    jksnnh jksnnh Jun 2, 2011 7:17 PM Flag

    Dont be an idiot. the FDA explicitly said: do a CV outcomes trial. do your homework, cv outcomes trials take 3-5 years and thousands of patients, you are basically trying to rule out that the drug does not increase the risk of heart attack, stroke or death, and this takes a while to show a difference.

    OREX is done, as is every other obesity company b/c the FDA does not want to approve expensive drugs with big side effects for a condition that can be "cured" by people just not being lazy and watching what they eat.

  • CV outcomes trials are long and expensive, thousands of patients for 4-5 years. OREX is on the hook for funding these based on the deal with Takeda. With $70m in cash, stock is not worth more than that at maybe $1-2/share.
    FDA does NOT want millions of people popping expensive drugs for weight loss they could achieve by changing their behavior
    Strong sell imo

  • I’m a shareholder and I think the very fact that you’ve chosen the Four Seasons, which is one of the most posh venues in Manhattan, to me underscores the disregard for shareholder value that you have exhibited, as does your $2,000 a month allowance for your company car and the $15 million that you’ve taken from the company (in compensation) between 2004 and 2009, not even counting 2010.

    And when you look at the stock you’ve seen a decline of $200 million of value since you have taken charge (seven years ago). You’ve spent $170 million in research and development, $125 million in SG&A, and yet you’ve advanced, as far as I can tell aside from Dacogen, nothing into advanced clinical trials.

    Now, what you’re proposing to do is to spend $130 million of shareholders’ money to buy a business that in 11 years, as far as I can tell, has not gotten a single drug into advanced clinical trials. And in fact you’re going to be burning $15 million a year of cash. So these drugs will require tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars to even get them to the market. Then there’s no guarantee…with the elderly AML clinical trial.

    You’re facing a cliff in November 2013 where your revenues will drop significantly. So I have two questions for you. The first question is, what are the calculations that you have used to justify the value of this transaction?…And the second question is have you considered selling the company, because when you look at the $2 of cash and the $2 of royalties you’ll receive and the 50 cents of tax loss carryforward approximately plus the pipeline, this is a Company that probably is worth $4.50, at least, okay, plus the pipeline…Thank you.

    How did Manuso reply?

    He appeared unfazed. He acknowledged there were other opportunities over time to sell SuperGen, but believes the value is greater than $4 a share. Whether this suggests SuperGen received an offer at that price or higher, though, is unclear. He then maintained that, when he arrived, there were two drugs in late-stage development, which is another way of saying other prospects had existed. Drug development, he argued, is a high-stakes gamble.

    As far as the spending on our parts are concerned, appreciate that this is a business that requires considerable amounts of cash.

    What about his compensation and other spending? He brushed aside the criticism that a small company made a point of hosting a conference in a high-rent hotel.

    As far as the cost of this venue is concerned, I would suggest that we do everything at low prices. I don’t have that exact number for you. And relative to my personal compensation it is certainly competitive with regard to the industry.

  • Looks like a 10% objective response rate for gatenespib as a single agent in heavily pretreated patients with 22/33 patients achieving target lesion stabilization. Results look really good?

  • jksnnh by jksnnh Dec 9, 2010 7:53 PM Flag

    SUPG has lost more than 50% of its value the past 3 years, while at the same time CEO was paid $10 million.

  • That is what SUPG is worth

  • credit the morgan stanley analyst who had the guts to get ahead of it, others (tanner) added no value

  • history of management is not good, pipeline is a farse. its worth only the cash on hand= $1.50

  • that's the cash/share, roughly. management has consistently and historically not been able to develop worthwhile assets, other than the cash they have on hand.

  • and other good habits, such as diet, and not taxing the healthcare system by popping pills and laying on the couch to loose weight. Please, if you are in this stock for a buyout, do not waste your time, I have nothing against anyone on the board, just trying to present objective thoughts. Look at Pfizer today, they stated they are dedicated to alzheimer's, oncololgy, diabetes, infectious disease, NOTHING about obesity. there are other potentiall partners/acquirers that feel the same way. yes, there are lots of obese people but if noone is willing to pay for these drugs, there's no market! sorry for a dose of reality, only time will tell the truth

  • what's the matter, can't keep the debate to the stock? bottom line is you know this is not a wise investment

113.80+2.40(+2.15%)Nov 24 4:00 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.
XOMA Corporation
NasdaqGMMon, Nov 24, 2014 4:00 PM EST