Recent

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

Seattle Genetics, Inc. Message Board

redhot47fla 36 posts  |  Last Activity: May 24, 2016 6:08 PM Member since: Aug 4, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    Baker Bros bought more SGEN

    by w1nner123 Mar 16, 2016 6:57 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 16, 2016 10:23 PM Flag

    What's amazing to me - and a little unsettling - is that the Bakers have managed to buy all of these shares on the open market without effectively turbocharging the share price. That's to their personal credit and it's a testament to their trading skills, though it's not necessarily to our immediate benefit. Still, one had to believe that sooner or later, probably sooner, the market will wake up to what's happening here and decide that it better follow the Bakers' lead and...boom...get behind this stock big-time (and close out any short positions pronto).

  • Reply to

    Baker Bros bought more SGEN

    by w1nner123 Mar 16, 2016 6:57 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 16, 2016 7:40 PM Flag

    Someone else added it up: 1,349,237 shares bought this week. So far.

  • Reply to

    Baker Bros bought more SGEN

    by w1nner123 Mar 16, 2016 6:57 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 16, 2016 7:13 PM Flag

    I'm too lazy to add it up, but it looks like they bought more than 1 million more shares yesterday and today. FWIW, during today's investor presentation, CEO Clay Siegall expressed noteworthy confidence in the LIV-1A trial in breast cancer.

  • Reply to

    What a volatile stock!

    by mslans Mar 15, 2016 7:01 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 15, 2016 10:21 PM Flag

    Mslans, welcome. SGEN always has been volatile. It gets played a lot by the hedgies, the traders and the shorts. I suggest that you just continually do your research and due diligence to determine if anything real is behind the volatility (it rarely is), and that you keep your eyes on the Bakers, thinking of them as canaries in the coal mine. They know better than any other investors in the world what's happening inside that company and what its prospects might be. If they're still holding or buying, that tells you something; if they start selling, that also will tell you something.

  • Reply to

    Question: Re Bakers

    by renmanaz Mar 15, 2016 8:32 AM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 15, 2016 2:00 PM Flag

    I see eight recent grayed out/ignored posts. I take it that the multi-aliased sanity-challenged math-deficient troll known as fstout57/quadhole/quadholes/rickarooski/term14/mauihope/etc. is off his meds and back again.

  • Reply to

    Question: Re Bakers

    by renmanaz Mar 15, 2016 8:32 AM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 15, 2016 1:12 PM Flag

    Renmanaz, I'm not really sure how relevant their average cost is to other investors, but the Bakers have been in the stock big-time since it was in single digits, so - even given the latest secondary and their recent purchases - their average price has to be well below the mid-30s. I would bet that it would come in somewhere in the 20s.

  • Reply to

    SGEN vs RGEN ($34 vs $27)

    by calspatsula Mar 14, 2016 3:05 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 14, 2016 6:17 PM Flag

    FWIW, that was Clay's answer when asked a few years ago about the possibility of being taken over. Basically: "We have a duty to listen to any offers, but our preference is ti remain independent and become a major pharmaceutical company." Of course, they all say that. :)

  • Reply to

    Baker-related theories?

    by redhot47fla Mar 11, 2016 9:29 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 12, 2016 7:22 PM Flag

    Thank you, barth, desert, kool and myboy. Your responses make sense and are very much appreciated.

  • Reply to

    Baker-related theories?

    by redhot47fla Mar 11, 2016 9:29 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 12, 2016 9:51 AM Flag

    Good points, indeed. Anyone have any other theories to consider? (Again, only serious replies, please.)

  • Reply to

    Baker-related theories?

    by redhot47fla Mar 11, 2016 9:29 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 12, 2016 8:48 AM Flag

    Applying Occam's razor ("Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected" or, put another way, the simplest proposed explanation usually turns out to be correct), I certainly agree that - with the benefit of their overall expertise and insider knowledge of SGEN - the Bakers probably are just opportunistically loading up for the inevitable high-price sale of SGEN to a Big Pharma.

    And I agree that, given how they handled the recent secondary, the Bakers seem relatively honorable and considerate of other shareholders, marking on a steep curve in view of what passes for conventional Wall Street ethics.

    But, again for what it's worth, another theory occurred to me last night:

    We know that the Bakers can't be buying shares if a BP offer is currently on the table, but they could, conceivably, make an offer tomorrow to take the company private at, say, a discount price of $35 or even $40 a share -- not really hoping or expecting to do so but, rather, in the expectation that such an offer would trigger an immediate bidding war by various Big Pharmas, a bidding war the would dramatically raise the share price and serve all of our interests.

    Again, that's just a theory to kick around and consider.

  • redhot47fla by redhot47fla Mar 11, 2016 9:29 PM Flag

    OK, so we're figuring that the Bakers - given their recent series of huge buys and their near-stranglehold on the company - plan to sell SGEN to a Big Pharma, probably within a year or so. Also, that they have no other way to monetize their huge holding because they can't efficiently sell their 37.4 million SGEN shares without dramatically flooding the market.

    But...are there other possibilities? Do they have something else up their sleeves? If so, what could it be? For instance, can they be thinking about taking the company private - and, if so, what would the likely result be for the rest of us? Other theories?

    Serious replies only, please. (Nothing from the multi-aliased troll - fsout/quadhole/rickarooski/mauihope/smelky/etc - will be read, since his aliases are all on ignore.)

  • Reply to

    Bakers up their stake to over 41 million shares

    by w1nner123 Mar 8, 2016 6:12 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 8, 2016 6:42 PM Flag

    They now own 29 percent of the company. They've bought around 3 million shares in just the last 30 days. This is extraordinary insider buying. I've never seen anything like it.

  • Reply to

    sgen baker

    by tony.lucania Mar 8, 2016 5:56 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 8, 2016 6:40 PM Flag

    Idiot. You're completely inside-out wrong.

  • Reply to

    CLDX

    by llabtechtwo Mar 7, 2016 11:00 AM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 8, 2016 12:39 PM Flag

    fjmardjetko, yeah, I still have a small amount. Still ahead, but obviously not as ahead as a few months ago. At this point, I'll just ride it out and see what happens.

  • Reply to

    CLDX

    by llabtechtwo Mar 7, 2016 11:00 AM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 8, 2016 9:02 AM Flag

    Agreed on all counts. SGEN is fine the way it is; CLDX is a major mystery, with many unanswered questions (still ahead on a small CLDX investment, but pretty disillusioned).

  • Reply to

    As predicted, the Bakers resumed buying SGEN...

    by redhot47fla Feb 17, 2016 6:03 PM
    redhot47fla redhot47fla Mar 2, 2016 7:41 PM Flag

    And...they bought another 500,000+ shares during the last three trading days. This is really quite extraordinary.

SGEN
39.59-0.68(-1.69%)May 26 4:00 PMEDT