420,000 x $261.25 = $109,725,000.......but what's a few zeros at that level. Ah...Cashier? Maybe the customers enjoy the interaction even more! (smile back).
I've added since we last did this. Think I'll leave it at that!
Have a great weekend and perhaps there's a BMW in your future.
"So I did the calculation by hand"
Jackie, Stick to the day job! Otherwise, well done.
Very much agree with your "past the point of no-return" comment, and their only eventual way out is through a buyout. As you say, selling on the open market will just drive down the pps, while buyout will increase the pps via a premium. So, yeah, buyout is in the future but question is when. Don't see it near term, too much organic growth to come over the next couple of years.
Not only do these conferences not automatically result in sky rocking, they never do as a matter of course for that's not their intent. Those suggesting otherwise either don't have a clue or are simply bs-ing. This is a very young company in terms of achievement, and although perhaps it has some promise, it's still 3 to 5 years away.
C'mon. 600 Shares? Didn't tank. Barely dripped. The 2,700 AH shares that traded above the $42.99 close also means absolutely nothing.
Well, I may disagree with some of todays stated details, but look forward to a congratulatory drink some day. We're both pulling on the same side and as this hopefully starts to roll out, your financial expertise will be of continuing value.
I don't get the frustration. There are no surprises in the Q1 report. There were no surprises in the 2014 Q4 report. Their business plan and performance to date, is exactly as stated by Milano when he first arrived. The only thing that is out of sync are the expectations of posters on this board who repeatedly express milestones, timeframes and pps growth based on consistently wildly enthusiastic inbred group think. And then to take those ludicrous expectations and fault management for not achieving them is quite remarkable. IDRA is a speculative investment that to date has produced zero drug efficacy data on any drug they will potentially take to the market. They, the current management team, have not failed at anything. They have stated a game plan and a time line and so far they are sticking to it. Will they succeed? We shall see.
kd, accurate info is never being "smart" (in the negative sense) from my perspective, so I thank you for that.
However, I am basing my comments on what has been stated publicly from Q1 2014 on, which from my perspective would be the more relevant time period. In the Q1 financials release it is stated under the section entitled Gene Silencing Oligonucleotide (GSO) Platform: "The company intends to initiate a clinical proof-of-concept studies for two disease indications as early as the second half of 2015." They are consistent with that time frame from that point forward in all the documentation that I have looked at.
For investors over the last 18 months, that would certainly be the more relevant data point.
Yes, I did note that in the Q4 2013 release they even state that the GSO indications would be announced in the second half to 2014. Anyone basing pps predictions on data that old for this company has, in my opinion, little reason to complain to today's management team.
I see absolutely nothing in the public records to support a claim that the company would announce and/or begin GSO trials in the first half of 2015, nor that they would report WM data, beyond very preliminary safety info (which they have reported on) in the first half of 2015 as well. In fact, they have consistently stated those time frames to be in the second half of 2015.
Your pps dogs**t predictions would seem to be simply a result of your lacking as opposed to IDRA's. If you can direct me to public company documentation that supports your position I will gladly retract these comments.
I believe that the BBs believe that the value here is in their science, already proven but yet to be significantly applied. They, the BBs, don't leave that much on the table. They're in no rush and they full well understand that they operate in a field with significant risk, and therefore look for very significant returns. I follow their moves closely, and SGEN, although it has performed well, is still very early in it's development curve. See no reason why the BBs would move to get out until that curve has been quite a bit more fully realized. Most of the real science risk is in the rear view mirror. The everyday business risk that they face with their investments are in every company they invest in.
As for me, I'm not going to be upset with a $64 PPS, or $80 or $96 or whatever $ (been in it since the $3s).
Kind of amazing that GEVA was bought for $8.4 million with no approved drugs presently on the market. Per the Boston Globe: "The company's most advanced product, which could be approved for use later this year, targets a disease estimated to afflict just 3,000 people in the developed world."
Every situation is different, but this example certainly supports Eduardo's exit strategy.
After many years of operation, company has produced absolutely no (as in zero) clinical efficacy trial data to this point on a drug that they intend to take to market. For those of us who are long, myself included, we're basing our investment expectations on peripheral bits of information - you all know the list.
But when times get tough, meaning pressure on the PPS, it's easy for others to bail at a relatively low dollar loss, on average perhaps a buck or two per share (forget about the % loss which only affects smaller investors) while at the same time its not such an attractive investment for new investors. In short, when times get tough, there is no prior efficacy data out there for many to rely on to confidently turn the stock price around. All the investor is left with is their hope that the peripherals will eventually be meaningful, something that many will find to be easy to take their investment somewhere else.
But, that leaves this for those that do continue to take the risk. There is absolutely no data out there that proves their science doesn't work, no failed trial releases, and while the downside is at most a buck or two, the upside is conservatively $20 or more. Given the peripherals, still a good bet from my perspective.