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

Seattle Genetics, Inc. Message Board

paladin_roams 24 posts  |  Last Activity: Jun 27, 2015 5:57 PM Member since: Nov 10, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 27, 2015 5:57 PM Flag

    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.

  • paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 27, 2015 5:09 PM Flag

    "So I did the calculation by hand"

    Jackie, Stick to the day job! Otherwise, well done.

  • Reply to

    JPM speaks and market is suprised?

    by biospeculator2014 Jun 15, 2015 12:28 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 15, 2015 12:37 PM Flag

    Well stated.

  • Reply to

    A suggestion

    by renmanaz Jun 2, 2015 4:59 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 2, 2015 8:22 PM Flag

    Because the day after tomorrow is twice the amount of tomorrow.

  • Reply to

    Has a buyout feel to it

    by llabtechtwo Jun 2, 2015 2:41 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 2, 2015 4:22 PM Flag

    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.

  • paladin_roams paladin_roams Jun 1, 2015 7:27 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Shorts added another 2.3M

    by idra_lt May 27, 2015 4:18 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 28, 2015 5:35 AM Flag

    Short #s are as of settlement date, not trade date.

  • Reply to

    Tanked after hours?

    by wsucougarsgrad May 20, 2015 4:29 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 20, 2015 4:50 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Bob Doody Mark This Post

    by biospeculator2014 May 11, 2015 9:31 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 11, 2015 2:36 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Bob Doody Mark This Post

    by biospeculator2014 May 11, 2015 9:31 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 11, 2015 2:03 PM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Bob Doody Mark This Post

    by biospeculator2014 May 11, 2015 9:31 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 11, 2015 11:02 AM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Bob Doody Mark This Post

    by biospeculator2014 May 11, 2015 9:31 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 11, 2015 10:04 AM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    an $8 Billion buyout equates to

    by renmanaz May 8, 2015 11:55 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 8, 2015 4:31 PM Flag

    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).

  • Reply to

    an $8 Billion buyout equates to

    by renmanaz May 8, 2015 11:55 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 8, 2015 4:14 PM Flag

    When, and if, this sells, it will be north of $15B. The real value here is still a few years away.

  • paladin_roams paladin_roams May 8, 2015 2:38 PM Flag

    I expect to be there.

  • Reply to

    Baker Brothers win again

    by kdreesen May 6, 2015 7:25 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 7, 2015 10:08 AM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    Baker Brothers win again

    by kdreesen May 6, 2015 7:25 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams May 6, 2015 7:59 AM Flag

    BBs bought the bulk of their shares, 7.5 million of 10.6 mil, in Q1 2012 around $30. Not bad for 3 years.

  • paladin_roams by paladin_roams Apr 30, 2015 8:48 AM Flag

    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.

  • Reply to

    B-Cell Cancers With MYD88 L265P Mutation

    by tauhydrae Apr 24, 2015 12:46 AM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams Apr 24, 2015 8:04 AM Flag

    Thanks. Good to get away from all of the junk posts, even if only for a brief interlude.

  • Reply to

    AACR: TLR abstract by PCYC (Bob Doody referred to)

    by tursta Apr 18, 2015 12:40 PM
    paladin_roams paladin_roams Apr 20, 2015 5:34 AM Flag

    BBs strong in PCYC. Connection? Interesting.

47.65-0.17(-0.36%)Jul 2 4:00 PMEDT