This next Tuesday, the company will present its quarterly conference call. Based on past quarterly CC's, CA and BG have not been reticent to provide reports on their research that have surprised and exceeded expectations. I expect the same at this CC.
Naga Wrote.... "and there is NO way that they will do a dilute with a secondary IPO. Never in a million years."
Really? What IF management announced a FC? Followed by the announcement of a secondary? Not out of the realm of possibilities since we are all speculating at this point...
Can someone inform me if it is possible for the defendants to recover the costs associated with the apparent recent dismissal of the suit against ARWR and members of its management? It is my understanding that within the US justice system that unsuccessful plaintiffs whose cases are dismissed are sometimes required to pay the legal fees of those entities they bring suit against. This might only include plaintiffs whose suits are dismissed in a with prejudice. Sorry, I don't really understand the mechanics of when and where this can be applied. I do suspect ARWR expended funds to defending the suit. As a shareholder, I would like to see those funds returned to the company...or is this a price of 'doing business'?
And of course what is not immediately realized in the comment thread is that this was likely a decision undertaken a number of months ago and is just being implemented now...and for particular reasons determined to benefit the company. ARWR management has consistently been six months to a year a head of where we think and/or imagine they are. The facility expansion in Madison, name change, etc. It is becoming a little more obvious what these folks are up to....
I am going to more or less repeat what I wrote earlier...IMO, Dr. A's comment about his not worrying about funding and the Madison expansion are not the behavior of a company that is in decline. They are ramping up. Expanding. This speaks confidence in their research and their outcomes. It suggests to me they already have a solution.
Again, IMO, shorting this company at this point in time is like running a car at high speed thru a red light at a busy intersection. You might get away with it once or twice, but you will get t-boned.
Wyattkap Wrote: "Have they seen solid data already (via open label) that gives them this amazing level of confidence to push the funding deals down the road another quarter or two..."
My opinion only but it does cause one to wonder. Coupled with Dr. A's comment about not worrying about funding and the Madison expansion. Not the sort of behavior of a company that is failing. They are ramping up. That suggests to me they likely have a solution.
I have to think that shorting this company at this point in time is like playing Russian Roulette or running a car at high speed thru a red light at a busy intersection. You might get away with it once or twice, but you will get crushed in the end. These signs are that it will occur much sooner than later.
Interesting that Michael Yee participated in yesterday's CC Q&A. In the past year this seems to have been delegated to an underling. Perhaps ARWR's continued clinical success and progress has required this personal attention.
HP Wrote" ....Dr. A's "im not laying awake sleepless at night worrying about capital requirements" statement is something all shareholders should think about, seriously........ Very seriously."
Funding has never been something I have been particularly concerned about. The science is good and as I have previously stated, there has been little doubt big pharma has been laser-focused on ARWR's accomplishments to date. As was stated in the CC, they are regularly talking to big pharma.
HP Wrote: "It could very well be that either Roch or Novartis, or both, have started this process for "other" novel drug candidates with ARWR under NDA's and predevelopment work is already under way to prepare for an eventual deal signing and an associated announcement..."
Hence one large reason behind the doubling (it is larger than a football field) of research space in Madison. IMHO.
bwan Wrote: "We are looking at the same data...."
Obwan and HP, yes we are looking at the same data. The data ARWR has been willing to show us. Management is not giving us the full picture of what they know and has stated as much. Be careful. ARWR management has a practice of being miles a head of where we think they are at any point in time. I suspect that is the current case. Consequently, tomorrow's CC ought to be further enlightening.