an immediate buy out at a reasonable price would be the best thing for long holders here
as should be more evident to all, the attendant risks here are significant
pass the torch
sooner the better for long holders
PS - as a part of the deal, keep the message board open for you know who and all his board names
"Simp08801 must be in the inner circle of parents as he suggested something about the boy who broke his leg was one of the poorer performers on this last measure. "
are you mad because I was too tired last night?
what about the prior 27 nights?
you must know, from your electronic encyclopedia, that I never said that
WHAT I SAID WAS THAT THERE WAS A RUMOR THAT HE HAD GAINED QUITE A BIT OF WEIGHT IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS
I never said he was a poor performer
and if you are worried that I am going to leave you for a dmd mother in the inner circle, you underestimate my adoration of you
you used the word "simple" in your post without my written permission or payment of the customary usage fee
if I see you do it again, ever, I will sue your sorry #$%$
this is both a warning and a threat
we never learn
we are retail!
I sold 95% of my position on the secondary announcement, as it thought it was tooooo soon after the FDA announcement and would cap the stock (as it did and then some)
I then bought it all back in the 27s thru 29s
did not sell any that I bought back, contrary to popular belief (apparently star/zoooey/thig must have misread my accounts when they hacked into them!)
I figured since nobody else took my advice why should I ?!
I lost approximately 8 college educations on paper yesterday (probably more than all my favorite board "friends" lost on a combined basis)
thank God/Bud I only have 2 kids
the market ALWAYS over reacts
it was way over reacting to what it thought the drug was
and then when it found out and began to realize what it really is, it way over reacted the other way
Ian on twitter had a beautiful example of this: "From week 48 to week 62 (only 24 weeks) - the treatment group declined 24 meters and it was fine - but now its negative - makes sense"
we have had two big wins here so far
I still think a 3rd is coming
but this was an expensive market attitude adjustment, for the moment
I have read your post
here are my responses
1. stop picking on me
2. why must you attack me?
3. I feel under attack
4. do not mess me with me, cuz I am never wrong
5. I think I am super
thank you for your support
if we go back to the rumors of a month ago in the dmd community ...
the boy who broke his ankle has allegedly gained a substantial amount of weight in the last 6 months, which has impacted his mobility
I believe he was a negative outlier in the aggregate results
I agree 100%. but some of the analysts are somehow worrying that the time on drug for each kid will now potentially be a shorter duration. i think that is nuts.
check his stock status filings
he has since had a "family law" event that materially impacted his holdings, and possibly his cash liquidity
its right in his filings, for quite some time now
I saw it when his net stock status took a fairly hefty drop
consider these questions:
first the assumptions:
1. etep efficacy IN THIS TRIAL ON THESE BOYS AT THESE AGES appears to fall off during year 3 and such trend continues, moving future 6mwt results closer to natural history decline
2. etep safety profile is and continues to be, in the world of drug development, pristine
now the questions:
1. since there is no current way to now know if the same or better efficacy limits would result if boys were put on drug at an earlier age, will the FDA, given the pristine safety profile, now require srpt to do a multi-year trial of younger boys before approving etep on some basis?
2. what is the history of the FDA approving drugs that have efficacy in a specific trial that is under 5 years in duration? (you could ask the same question using 1 year and get a similar answer ...)
3. assuming the common assumption becomes that etep has a "not forever" efficacy horizon of some sort, but is approved by the FDA, how does the "not forever" thing impact revenue projections for etep?
IMO, the market will be tripping all over #3, and currently, I still do not understand WHY
yesterday's analyst statements evidence quite a bit of tripping to me
19,000,000 shares traded
whether the market got the message right or wrong, the reaction to the message was violent
and even if this stock has (had) a larger than norm retail base, that kind of volume is wayyy past retail
I suspect confusion with abound here, at least for now
the list of questions investors will now obsess over materially grew yesterday
and those questions are not bullish
the volume and money flow proves that out
perhaps only a full on, across the board, corporate update will be required to put a realistic face on the totality of the data
take the total distance loss over three years ... what would have happened yesterday if the loss was pro rata over three years as opposed to an apparent spike down in year 3?
what if the average distance loss in year 2 was actually more than it was in year 3? (IT WAS)
the union needs to be peeled
06/30/2014 10,599,929 shares
06/13/2014 11,305,930 shares
shorts were covering while price was dropping
um, that means longs were selling
but none of this means anything after the last 7 trading days
its a brave new world now
no telling what the short interest is now
19,000,000 shares traded today
short interest could be 5 million, or 20 million shares
the as of july 15 report will tell the tale
I want you to read your post that I am responding to
and then read this quote from your prior post:
"Gotta admit that Simp wasn't far off the mark is his comments about the data being more complicated for various reasons, that the stellar headlines from the 120 might overshadow today's, and there was a chance that many might sell when they didn't get "cure" type headlines. Now if he/she could just do something about that personality. eeshh."
how about that last sentence?
it appears to me that you were actually describing yourself in this post
you were not man enough about anything
when you could no longer tell me how wrong I was about what I said, you still could not help yourself and decided to now complain about my personality
all of this, before I said a single word to you response
SO WHY IS IT OK FOR YOU TO MAKE DEROGATORY STATEMENTS, UNSOLICITED, BUT NOT OK FOR ME TO DO SO, IN RESPONSE?
(hint: its ok because you are a clueless doooooosh)
I should have said more than I did
I was kind, and your welcome
I heard he reads your posts, all day, and mumbles the following:
"wow, that TURD, devilsfan, sure has an AWFUL lotta time on his hands, to be posting TERRIBLE things about Srpt, all day, every day"
you can quote me
1. how does 144 week data impact AA analysis by FDA (timing and substance), up or down, if at all?
2. how does 144 week data impact current (pre 144 week data) Srpt ex 51 revenue projections off FDA approval, being used by analysts, up or down, if at all?
IMO, the disparate analyst reactions today evidence new confusion over these issues
Roth is a perfect example
BUY intact but price target markedly dropped from 50s to 30s
so that analyst apparently still believes FDA approval still likely, but the data has done something to his underlying assumptions to result in a material price target reduction?
IMO, expect further lunacy for a while
As of now, the Citi analyst has won today's confusion (I am being kind) award
thank you very much for that heartfelt admission that you and several others just like you were galactic moronic imbeciles, times infinity and beyond, for mindlessly attacking the messenger and ignoring the message, consistent with the lemming retail long code of honor that you all wear so well
as for your inclusion in your post of taking a new swipe at me, this time for my personality, I have but just one thing to say
my favorite part of your post was "wasn't far off the mark"
now that was hilarious
thank you again
its not that they can't read
its worse than that
THEY REFUSE TO READ
they refuse to read anything negative when they are in super kool aid mode
and they refuse to read anything positive when they are in emotional wreck mode
this is a 100% guaranteed effective prescription for wealth transfer, from them, to short sellers
we have that in black aces of spades today
there you go, calling names
last week, you called names when anybody said anything which suggested things were not perfect
and now today, you call names when anybody says anything which suggests things are not as bad as you think!
um, I smell retail gone emotional wreck
foxy, I sincerely hope you get control of your emotions, as emotions kill in the market
step number 1
UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY INVESTED IN, NOT WHAT YOU DEMAND THAT YOU WERE INVESTED IN
the 120 week data details were your signal, had you taken the time to actually look at what they showed
I know you can do it