cde: not quite sure what you mean by "if ABBV just keeps up what it has been doing, then for all Geno types...". Are you extrapolating (supposed) GT1 numbers to GT2-6??
AFAIK, VP was cleared by FDA ONLY for GT1. In addition, GT1A treatment with VP REQUIRES ribavirin and peg-interferon, hence is only at all likely to be prescribed for GT1B (only about 1/3 of the total GT1 cases).
I do not understand the format or content of the rest of your stats either, but that's really a detail compared to the enormity of the above apparent errors.
numbskull: it WAS in my original posts, but you could not understand, because you have the brain of a watermelon and the reading skills of a cockroach.
frigator: be interesting to hear your evidence for "Insurance is not paying for Harvoni ...". Is this based on a few anecdotes or can you see a large dbase that most people cannot, eg. in your work?
After all, what we do know is that Friday scripts are increasing hand-over-fist, and Gilead's whole plan is to increase scripts by reducing price, in such a way that revenue is actually increased (a lot).
To decide whether (specifically) Vibex VERSUS the Rasuvo syringe is a factor, wouldn't one like to know how often they are actually presented competitively? Did the Rasuvo salesmen go to (at least some of) the same doctors as the Otrexup salesmen had already visited? Or did/do they ply completely distinct sets of docs?
On a separate, but related, note, if I were in charge of the O sales effort, I would find out which docs the R salesforce had covered, and go in a week behind them - because a lot of the softening-up sales effort (ie. the general concept of something between oral and biologic) has already been done: "remember that Mtx injector, well, this is a far superior product BECAUSE....".
[Actually, I've no idea whether that move would be cost-effective RELATIVE to hitting new RA quacks, because I don't know how many (what proportion) of the total population each force has already hit, but I like the general sales idea. I would think Rasuvo would be a tough sell if the O-rep has already been by.]
Puzzles the heck out of me. There's AMZN with its years of losses (including 2014), never made the money GILD made last Q in its entire history, nor ever will, yet it's up 25% from the session before announcing its $0.45 Q4 EPS, and negative (over 2bn) FCF.
Ditto CRM and LNKD, no GAAP profits, ever, and 3-figure P/E even for alleged non-GAAP profits.
Yet analysts sniff up GILD's hindquarters for every penny, after a blowout quarter, record everything, fabulous prospects and pipeline, etc., etc.. Even a 10-12 P/E on GAAP earnings is begrudged.
It's as if these stocks exist in different universes. (Ditto AAPL in 2012-2013 vs utter junk like AMZN, CRM, LNKD - it was the same then too.) It's hard not to become a conspiracy-theory-nut, as in "GILD doesn't need Wall St, but the others do...", etc.
I'm not "bashing". This company doesn't need bashers, it bashes itself. Cheerleading and delusion won't help you. But go ahead, hit the red-thumb a few more times, that'll help you feel better.
The word is "sleight", FYI.
Who said I threw in the towel?? As I have already stated, I am waiting for the Epi AB determination, as I believe it will (AT LAST) provide a positive for this dog of a stock, evidently mamaged by serial losers.
To my knowledge, no one has posted script #s since early Dec, so I can surely be excused for commenting NOW on progress since last autumn, WITHOUT someone who HAS seen the scripts (but did not post them here - I wonder why?) labeling that "strange".
Of course, I too very much hope the scripts improve in the coming weeks. In summary, I am not, nor will ever be, one of those who posts here (or anywhere) without a stake. I despise the googoo-delusional, fake-positive posting of certain dolts here, but when I sell my remaining 40K shares, you won't have to hear from me here anymore! f any 2 companies could balls up the Epi AB decision, it's Teva and Antares, but I don't think even they can get it wrong now.
You seem to have the intelligence and reading comprehension of the average ATRS investor. I said "I have not seen the figures for some weeks". If you HAVE, why didn't you post them? They are STILL LOUSY, relative to Ali's MODERATE S-curve parms. So glad they've been improving though, that is a relief.
Apologies, the "record" thought was relative to NRx, eg. 10/03 was 325 and 9/26 was 319, so 279 now, 4-5 months on, seems nothing special at all. You do not say why you characterize my post as "strange", so I cannot really comment on that. I have not seen the figures for some weeks, so I apologize again for being late pointing out to you how disappointing they continue to be.
Thanks rph! Everyone appreciates very much. As a reminder, here is an Oct-Dec run of #s I copied:
12/05 Total 529 New 275
11//28 Total 479 New 268
11/21 total 559 new 306
11/14 total 524 new 255
11/07 total 463 new 222
10/31 total 530 New 268
10/24 total 573 New 299
10/17 total 475 New 279
As anyone objective can see, neither the NRx nor the TRx are anything special, even by our own nediocre historical standards. With this week's Rasuvo's, we would have a record - no idea whether the Medac salesmen even visit the same docs as ours do, of course.
Sorry, gang, we have to look elsewhere for improvement in PPS.
Well, first, congratulations on having got out with a good profit. Over a 2 1/2 year period, 2012-14, my ATRS long position built up to be almost 20% of my portfolio at one time. I fell in love with the Otrexup possibility, though - good lord - they had so much else going on in the pipeline!
Management was crisp and sharp, in the personage of a fellow, sparklingly-witty Englishman, a man who had dragged Antares from the mediocre let's-partner-our-gels business model, to the triumph a go-it-alone Otrexup was clearly just about to be,
Why do I hold now? Well, first, I cut back strongly over the past few months, as the risk and managerial incompetence have increased so greatly that even I could no longer ignore it. But the reason to hold (less) is simple. Epi-AB would move PPS close to $3., because the market will give it credit for about a $0.50 contribution to EPS (we hashed that out in the last month or so, in agonisingly bitter threads).
At that point (whenever the Epi decision comes out) I will be gone, be it $2 or $3. The other Longs can have the QST project, and the faint possibility that O will ever show a profit.
I apologize there's no material that could make anyone go long (again) in this post. My contribution is to turn you on to TNXP if you haven't been already. The current PPS is ABSURD, given that they are now fully-financed and permissioned for the FM P3 study, and will surely go to market at most 3 years from now. At that point, their drug will be prescribed off-label for PTSD too. Big, big markets in each case.
tdp: a question on the economic (pricing) aspect only: if the threat to Mylan's share from Teva's entry is so great, why do they also not lower their price at that time? Their (Mylan's) costs are presumably long-since amortized, whereas T/A are new entrants, much hungrier to cover investment costs. And, yes, the economics course had a little material on duopolists and oligopolists and game theory, but look at what (is supposed to have) happened with Gilead's sofosbuvir, as soon as even an inferior competitor showed up - (up to) a 46% rebate, it is said.
So, if I were a Mylan marketing strategist, I wouldn't just sit there and watch 50% of the market share go south. I'm not saying they will/would (because I do not know), but I bet Mylan COULD push pricing right to the point where T/A wasn't doing much more than break even, and the Mylan product was still (say) 10% more expensive - or whatever would preserve share much higher than 50%.
If I've got it all wrong, please let everyone know - I'm only curious about the spectacle.
"Sub-Q injection works just like intra muscular injection": it's a very different kind of "work"(ing), as the end points of the study attest!
IM-injectors experience undesirable fluctuations in T/blood concentration. Sub-Q, among other advantages. allows more frequent injection and stabilizes T-level.
A layman, like yours truly, perceives an analogy with the Afrezza/Technosphere platform. If there were hypos and hypers with T, as with insulin, the investment thesis with QST would be even more dramatic, but the latter is there, for all that.
The problem, as we all know, even the frothing-at-the-mouth Longs, is that with the trail of failure and disappointment that Antares has blazed, few believe anythng they say, or represent, anymore.
I do not fully understand the recently-articulated short thesis of andre and whogo, that management is "irresponsible" not to do a secondary NOW. These 2 are the DEANS of probability-based investing. If Epi-AB is a 90:10 probability (ie 9-to-1 on), then, technically, Antares ought to do a SMALL raise now, to cover until the coming of the QST data readouts. But to blast the PPS with a full raise at $2, then followed by Epi-AB, would make them look even stupider than they really are.
If Antares had any financial management with a clue they would ALREADY have talked with funds like Blackrock about private-raise IF Epi-AB does not emerge. Large funds understand that the pipeline (especially QST) still has to be supported, even if Otrexup continues a dud, and Epi arrives DOA, or no AB. A deal can be done, and already should have been announced. This management is just a dud, and that's all there is to say.
Not wrong in general. That week (maybe you did not see the date of this post), the posting for IMS did not seem to have the expected relationship with the Symphony numbers, and seemed, besides, implausible. Water under the bridge.
Thanks for posting, joe. Shame the analyst (Louise Chen - Guggenheim) did not follow up with Siggi, about the market share. She asked, but he forgot to respond to that bit.
What was also VERY clear was how GILD negotiated compensating volume increases with all the govt agencies (ESPECIALLY in Europe, see Martin's repeated remarks in Q&A), such that $ revenues were maintained or even increased in line with (GILD's) expectations from the negotiation. This is obviously the way to play it with agencies that have a more-or-less fixed budget to play with. Both sides win, as more patients are treated, with more of the total all-time $ going into Gilead's treasury BEFORE the real competition (if any) gets approved. Short at your peril.
bear, you're fine, just ignore the cretins.
Please say why you are currently short: (1) a short-term trade, just because you think the PPS will continue to fall (2) you truly don't think the fundamentals are worth 102?
"in process", so you mean it WAS just granted by the US Patents office? My original question then applies.
Further: even though (you mention) this patent covers a non-jet (ie. bolus) device (so it is NOT the device used for Otrexup), this is still relevant to this case, where Medac is the plaintiff (I could more understand its relevance in the case where Antares is the plaintiff)?
Anyway, I see that you are still gathering opinions, and we are all most interested to hear more. The clearing of this wretched lawsuit would hopefully do as much for PPS as its filing hurt.
tdp: I do see an Antares patent listed in the court documents with today's date.
If this is indeed a new patent, newly and officially granted, then how does/could it apply to a device Medac developed years ago, and obtained permission to market in 2014?
If, on the contrary, this is an older patent, that Antares feels throws into doubt the validity of the FDA permission to Rasuvo, and the marketing of the devices already acoomplished, then why is Antares only bringing this to light now?