I looked at the YOY numbers. On the surface, it looks like a fantastic YOY increase. There's a "but." There's a reason why the street is unimpressed. One year ago, 1st Q numbers were disappointingly down because of low orders from Mitek -- "inventory rebalancing" or some such. Directly comparing Q1 2016 #s with Q1 2015 #s is therefore not unlike when folks got all excited a few years back when the numbers were unusually high because of a one-time milestone payment.
Numbers don't lie, and it's always better to be up than either flat or down, but the numbers need to be analyzed in a complete context.
I would never try to predict or project future share prices. My crystal ball is murky, and the vicissitudes of Mr. Market can be known only to those whose high-volume trading capacities allow them to create and manipulate the wild price swings In the first place.
I still hold my extra-long position. Would I love to see it get to 60? Of course! To 75? Even better! Plunge back down to ninety-one cents? Hope not. Someday I'll decide to sell and convert my after-tax proceeds to income-producing investments. Right now, I have enough CL and PG and GIS and KMB to keep me comfortable. If I need more income further into retirement, I hope ANIK will be at a higher price then than it is today. I do believe it would be much higher -- or long-ago acquired at a very nice premium -- if senior management had been more effective. But I'm not crying into my soup about it.
And another "prediction" bites the dust ...
Look -- this is not merely a small-float stock -- it's a minuscule-float stock. Logic doesn't work on such stocks -- never did, never will. Traders play games. Big traders play big games.
You want "rational" stock price movements? You won't even get that with large-caps. Thinking that you'll get that with micro-caps is -- um, again, I can't think of a polite way to phrase what I am thinking. Sorry about that.
It's April29th, 8:29 PM. What think thou now?
Irrational volatility strikes again, as usual. :-)
Maybe. Your crystal ball can't really be that much less murky than mine!
And you were wrong.
You're going to have to learn that Anika stock prices are quite unpredictable!
Illogical, yes. Unpredictable, yes. And anyone who thinks his or her crystal ball is crystal clear on this topic is, um, I can't think of a polite way to say it.
Sorry about that. Truth is truth.
All true -- I read the JNJ press release myself. The partnership between JNJ and ANIK has been very positive for both companies. HOWEVER -- what is your take on the fact that Anika has announced its plans to "go it alone" with Cingal? Anika has brought in its own marketing team, and has made it very clear that they plan to do their own Cingal marketing and distribution. Why are they not teaming up with JNJ on Cingal? They are also going to do their own marketing / distribution of all their other products, both currently available and "in pipeline," exc. for Orthovisc and Monovisc, which are still contractually being marketed / distributed by JNJ. When does that marketing contract expire? What will happen then? Biggest Q of all, do you think (based on prior experience with other products) that Anika will be successful at marketing / distributing their own products?
Such questions can only be answered "after the fact." But this new-found aggressiveness toward self-determination on the part of Anika's management is a new wrinkle in Anika's business plan. The new pathway can, IMHO, only result in two extremes: huge success, or huge failure. How's your crystal ball?
I do remember your posts -- you were passionate! And I never understood why you bothered to make direct contact with Anika secondary execs (secondary to Chuck Sherwood, that is).
Hope you had a Happy Easter.
I don't know any more than I've learned from the press releases and voting materials sent to stockholders. But I do read them quite carefully, and I've done so since I first acquired my first 45 shares as a spinoff. Back then, my "stock portfolio" was extremely slim (both in #s of stocks and # of $$s) and so I was able to spend time doing that even while working.
In fact, that's probably why I feel so stupidly emotionally attached to my Anika shares. When I bought Medchem (I forget exactly when, sometime between 1988 and 1991), which was the company that spun off Anika just before being acquired by Bard), the only other stock market thing I owned was a biotech-focused mutual fund (which I also still hold). Then when my mother died in the mid-90's, I inherited her stock portfolio worth about $35,000 consisting of equal dollar amounts of big pharma (3 companies) and utilities (6 companies). I sold one of the pharmaceutical companies several years later, some of the utilities were bought out for cash, and the rest of them -- mergers and name changes notwithstanding -- I still hold. That was my learning period. I think I learned well -- I retired at 60.
Alas, Biopharm28, you are 100% correct in your analysis. The Italian acquisition was ill-advised at best; it merely served to provide Sherwood with a nice "acquisition bonus" that year. And they are absolutely foolish to try to market and distribute anything -- ANYTHING -- on their own. Sherwood has a track record of decision-making that ranges from ill-advised to "#*%!#*$%!" and the Board consists of folks who really have no way of evaluating the decisions Sherwood makes because they don't understand the products or the field. They were genuinely helpful in finding a new location in the Boston area (one of them really knows commercial real estate), and they help when they can, but there's nobody there who can say "whoa! that's dumb!" for many of these decisions.
I really expected things to change as a result of the success via partnership with JNJ. Now it's worse because they've actually GOT SOMETHING that they're destroying (as you pointed out). I am seriously considering finally selling some (or maybe all) of my antique shares if the share price ever gets up to $50 again.
Back to Cartiheal vs. Hyalofast -- I just looked at the Hyalofast website. Apparently the product (a HYAFF matrix scaffolding) can be used either with or without pre-collected stem cells. When used "off the shelf," as it were, without pre-infiltrating with stem cells, proliferation-capable chondroblasts (the website calls them "mesenchymal cells") must be present in the knee space, and the physician first "mobilizes" these cells mechanically via "micro fracture" or "perforation."
Ergo, even the Hyalofast product is available as a "cell-free" product. So the only real difference between Hyalofast (which has been in use for at least five years, and the patients who got the treatment five years ago are still being followed) and Cartiheal must be the chemical composition of the scaffold matrix. Cartiheal's company is being secretive about the components of the matrix ("biocompatible and biodegradable materials) whereas Hyalofast is known to be a crooslinked HA-based scaffold. I cannot address the pros and cons of cellular pre-infiltration of such scaffolds. There is a body research literature on the efficacy of non-cellular scaffold in knee cartilage regeneration, which I have not looked at and don't intend to (I'm RETIRED!).
So: the relationship between ANK and JNJ is becoming increasingly unclear to me. It seems as if they are still mutually commensal (and dependent on each other) with respect to Orthovisc and Monovisc -- that includes the US clinical trials of MiniVisc --- but playing a spitting contest with respect to Cingal and Hyalofast/Cartiheal. I don't know the politics here, but spitting contests always seem to me to be unhealthy, especially among friends who need each other. For example, look at Apple / Samsung. We'll see.
Biopharm28 - I do thank you, very much, for bringing the Cartiheal company to my attention. This is a very, very new development -- the JNJ investment press release was only released in mid-January 2016 and I was unaware of either the Israeli company or the JNJ investment.
The Israeli company is still a "start-up." Apparently, Cartiheal has only been tested in "nearly 200 patients" and is not yet marketed commercially, whereas Hyalofast is much further along, has been in use for several years, and is already marketed in Europe. It may well be that the Israeli product will ultimately prove to be superior to Hyalofast (or not). Apparently there are folks at JNJ who think it will, or else they would not have provided the start-up funds. Of course, according to the press release, there are quite a few other pharmaceutical companies that are also investing in the Israeli start-up.
One difference that may turn out to be important, both positively and negatively, is that the Israeli product is cell-free, whereas Hyalofast is a combination of an HA matrix plus endogenous adult stem cells (taken from the patient). The positive aspect of this is that the regeneration is presumed to be via differentiation of the stem cells, i.e., de novo in a sense, whereas a cell-free matrix would require the pre-existence of regeneration-capable cells in the joint itself; which may or may not be the case if the osteoarthritis is advanced. Another difference, which is probably a negative, is that the Israeli product is "off-the-shelf" and only requires implantation, whereas the physician must be specially trained in the use of Hyalofast, since the physician must collect the patient's stem cells and infiltrate them into the matrix prior to the surgical implantation.
We shall see! But again, thanks for the information!
Biopharm28 -- With respect to Amvisc, the odd fact is that we are both correct. However, I've been around a bit longer than you. IOLAB Corporation was originally a subsidiary of JNJ. Anika started making Amvisc for IOLAB in 1992, when it was owned by J&J. Then CIBA Vision bought IOLAB from JNJ in 1994. Sometime later, there was at least one more corporate change whereupon the IOLAB name was changed to "Bausch&Lomb Surgical." If you Google "IOLAB Corp.," you'll find a website that tells you that it's now a part of B&L and is called Bausch & Lomb Surgical. Of course, B&L is now privately held, and much of what used to be B&L was sold off, but the ophthalmic surgical unit is still part of B&L. And yes, Anika continued to manufacture Amvisc for the company, whatever it was being called at the time, for 22 years (up until 2014). You can read about the history of Anika and its products on the Anika website -- The Anika website specifically mentions that Amvisc was its first product, and that it was distributed by IOLAB. Interestingly, Anika also provided the same or very similar product(s) to other ophthalmic surgical companies, including STAAR Surgical (STAARVisc), Cytosol Ophthalmics (Sheligel), and a product for HOYA Surgical Optics the name of which I can't bring to mind.
Did you know that Anika also makes a veterinary product for horses?
bradpoleon -- oh, I dearly wish your pipe dreams are true, but history suggests otherwise. JNJ has been a distribution partner for one or another of Anika's products since Anika was spun off as an independent company in 1992. JNJ distributed their ophthalmic product through its Iolabs unit (Amvisc, e.g.) for 22 years (they terminated the contract in 2014) and they've been distributing Orthovisc and Monovisc via Mitek ever since the FDA (after inordinate delays) approved the products (that remains ongoing). Thus, JNJ is a logical potential "acquirer" and has had ample opportunity over the past 24 years to do something. But they didn't. A large part of that, I suspect, is that JNJ is stove-piped (explanation of that term comes later in this comment). At this point, the relationship between Anika and JNJ appears to be changing, somewhat weirdly. Mitek (oh, okay, Depuy-Mitek) is continuing to collaborate with Anika in terms of the clinical trials for the use of Orthovisc and Monovisc in arthritis-prone joints other than knees (hips, fingers, ankles, etc.). However, they are NOT collaborating with respect to Cingal, which -- once it's approved -- will be a direct competitor to Monovisc; and as far as I can tell, they are also not competing with the cartilage regeneration product (the HA matrix imbedded with autologous stem cells) which, once it gets FDA approval, is likely to revolutionize arthritic joint care.Why not? AND JNJ is not involved in the wound-healing and surgical HA-based devices that Anika has been marketing overseas and are currently part of the USA "pipeline." Again, one of the problems with JNJ is its stove-piped structure, by which I mean that each subsidiary operates autonomously. So, even if Mitek were interested in acquiring Anika for the Orthovisc/Monovisc products, there's no communication with the parts of JNJ that are concerned with surgical or wound-healing products. That's a show-stopper right there, I think. At least vis-a-vis JNJ.
Thank you, islb3, for your clarification. Some slight quibbles (e.g., individual states control Medicaid, not the federal government), but overall I agree with your comment. Also, I think the "retail" is "crazy high." My observations, based on the insurance "explanation of benefits" forms I receive, indicate exactly that. Some doctors charge a "retail" price that is exactly or very closely in line with the insurance allowances (and in my case, it's Medicare because that's my primary), while some charge anywhere from two to five times the insurance allowance (even though they "accept assignment" and/or are "preferred providers" for my secondary coverage). Some of the commercial clinical labs are far worse than even the worst doctors: I've seen "retail" prices listed on those "explanation of benefits" forms that are sometimes more than TEN TIMES the "plan allowance" charges, and believe me, those labs happily accept the "plan allowances" because they are highly profitable companies.
What I don't know is whether or not there is some tax benefit for the docs a/o the labs in "billing" at retail prices despite getting reimbursed at far lower sums. Does anyone out there know if the difference between "billed" and "insurance reimbursed" is tax-deductible for the providers?
Excellent, truly very excellent advice to your following here on the Anika Message Board. SELL SELL SELL -- hurry up and SELL!!!! If enough of us do that, it would stop the Anika price surge, reverse the course of the price trajectory, bring the price down (down, down, down) and then YOU will SWOOP in and buy TONS of Anika stock at bargain basement prices and show us all how it's done!
Oh, yes, very excellent advice. Superlatively excellent advice. Now go back to some other message boards and try that same trick on a different group of people.
Oh, biopharm28, why bother beating a dead horse? We know about Dr. Sherwood's level of managerial common sense. In fact, the buyback bothers me enormously. I think buybacks are a waste of money, a senseless gamble -- unless ---- UNLESS --- Anika has a reason for wanting a large stock treasury inventory. If there is a secret reason for increasing the number of shares "in treasury," then perhaps it's the kind of reason that would lead them to not want to create that inventory by merely increasing the number of shares, which would require the consent of the shareholders AND would dilute shareholders' equity (also making it difficult to get the consent in the first place). Perhaps some upper-level company officials are hoping for a great big stock bonus? (Ugh).
I ALSO continue to be bothered by the attempt to do their own distribution and marketing. The track record is dismal in this arena. Based on the transcript of the morning phone call, it seems as if they've already begun to take the first steps toward this, by hiring a firm to get it started. At the same time, they are still actively partnering with JNJ ( with respect to getting Orthovisc and Monovisc approved for arthritic joints other than knees). It's all quite bizarre. Clearly, their heads don't work in the same way as mine does. And no -- I really don't think I'm gaga yet.
What "hospital administrators" might fear, with respect to drug and device pricing, and what is REAL, seem to be two very different things different things. Obamacare has absolutely nothing in its legislation that permits "the government" (i.e., the executive branch) from doing anything with regard to drug pricing (or "medical devices" such as Anika's current products, knee or hip replacement devices, etc.). In fact, Medicare Part D legislation explicitly forbids -- FORBIDS -- the executive branch from negotiating drug prices with pharmacy companies, even though private insurance companies do it all the time. Yes, yes, I know, Medicare Part D is not "Obamacare" -- but the sentiment of the legislative branch (which is the branch of government that brought you "Obamacare" in its present form) is 100% clear., and that sentiment applies to both pieces of legislation equally.
Perhaps you are arguing a different point, in which case, what is the point you are trying to argue? This thread is about a biotech company called Anika Therapeutics. Are your comments relevant to Anika, or perhaps to something else? Something that I don't quite understand? i