Recent

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

Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. Message Board

simp08801 140 posts  |  Last Activity: May 25, 2016 5:50 PM Member since: Apr 10, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • simp08801 by simp08801 Mar 22, 2016 4:01 PM Flag

    this is JMO, but having said that, we can all agree I have never been wrong, nor will I ever so be

    GIVEN YESTERDAY'S VOLUME AND MOVE, THE STOCK TRADES LIKE A CHAMP TODAY

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 21, 2016 9:31 PM Flag

    Assume that whatever the FDA does, addendum it rewrite, it will be more negative than positive

    To assume otherwise is in a word, lunacy

  • Criticisms that many of the kols have close ties to Srpt and have been paid via Srpt are legitimate

    The two main authors are dmd parents too

    All in a great kol letter but many of the kols do have close ties to srpt

  • I wonder if he was even asked to

    ...

  • simp08801 by simp08801 Mar 21, 2016 1:03 PM Flag

    I appreciate your cynical eye and I have one too

    but I am not with you on the insider buys, and especially the senior staff converting cash bonuses into stock of their own volition

    IMO, people do not spend their own money for a greater good, and rather they always spend it for their own personal greed

    it was not about an impending cash raise, IMO

    they are just plain old fashioned bullish

    and they obviously knew about the KOL letter

  • Reply to

    MEGLA BULLISH SRPT SIGNAL

    by simp08801 Mar 21, 2016 9:40 AM
    simp08801 simp08801 Mar 21, 2016 10:24 AM Flag

    ed kaye voluntarily converted $64,491 of his awarded 2015 cash bonus into 4,704 shares at $13.71

    this is particularly bullish, when you remember that for 3 years in a row, he has sold $100,000 of srpt stock for cash flow purposes

    thus, he is not rolling in cash, but still elected to exchange 25% of his cash bonus for stock

    um, I think ed believes

  • I believe the recent BOD open market buys were bullish, for sure, for all obvious reasons

    BUT THERE HAS BEEN SOMETHING PUBLIC SINCE MARCH 2, 2016 THAT I BELIEVE IS MUCH, MUCH MORE BULLISH

    And I am very surprised it has not been discussed on any public forum yet

    Read the first footnote in every form 4 filed for srpt on March 2, 2016 (these all relate to stock awards to senior srpt administration, including Ed Kaye)

    "100% of the Restricted Stock Award granted on February 29, 2016 vests six months from the date of grant. This award is being provided in lieu of a portion of the executive's cash bonus and is subject to continued service with the Issuer."

    Thus, all the srpt senior staffers (from Kaye on down), VOLUNTARILY elected to convert a portion of their 2015 performance cash bonuses into stock (in some instances as high as 25%)

    NOW THAT IS MEGLA BULLISH TO THIS STOCK MONKEY

    I CAN THINK OF NO BETTER BULLISH SIGNAL THAN A SENIOR EMPLOYEE WANTING TO EXCHANGE A CASH BONUS FOR STOCK

    It appears to me that all the senior staff and BOD at srpt are very bullish on their etep approval prospects

  • Reply to

    can we all stop arguing

    by starfe11 Mar 19, 2016 10:26 AM
    simp08801 simp08801 Mar 19, 2016 11:19 AM Flag

    I agree

    Oh, you are all butt sniffers and are all dead to me

  • Reply to

    Insider Purchases not always good to follow

    by outtinfront Mar 18, 2016 3:19 PM
    simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 4:10 PM Flag

    dear out

    how double dare you!

    are you not aware that it has already been settled on this board that all three srpt insiders bought stock because they each had in their possession, multitudes of material non-public inside information

    shame shame tisk tisk and all other stuff like that

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 9:16 AM Flag

    ok immediate

    I give up

    I offer you one last bit of advice

    research the outcomes of insider buys historically

    on your theory, insider buys should be a literal guaranteed pathway to money

    if you research this, you will be stunned at the outcomes

    you have all of this perfectly backwards

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 8:49 AM Flag

    harry that would be on the filings

    they were all open market direct purchases and not option related

    t

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 8:43 AM Flag

    ONE LAST POINT FOR THE INSANE ASYLUM

    what do you think the stock would have done yesterday if the market generally believed that the srpt insiders bought on direct non public material info, such as new trial data?

    THE STOCK WOULD HAVE TRADED 10,000,000+ SHARES AND HAVE BEEN AT 25!!!!!!!!!!!

    experienced market participants know the buys were bullish, but they do not assign "tangible material bullish knowledge" to the buys!

    you probably had a million shares of retail in the initial run-up, and some retail short covering

    no big players saw the buys and said "wow super data is definitely out" and I need to buy in front of it

    again, the volume would have been 10 million shares

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 8:35 AM Flag

    immediate

    OF COURSE THEY ALL BOUGHT AT THE SAME TIME

    the lawyers determined the insider buy/sell window was open because there was no material info in house at the moment

    the company is likely expecting to hear from the fda soon, so if anybody wanted to buy or sell, they had to hit the window before the info flow with fda starts up again

    have you not ever noticed that with all real public companies, the insider transactions are always around the same tight time frame?!!!!!!! do you think that is coincidence?!!!!!!!!!!

    IT IS BECAUSE THE LAWYERS DETERMINED THE BUY/SELL WINDOW IS OPEN!!!!!!!!

    you have all of this exactly backwards

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 8:03 AM Flag

    dear immediate

    your theory is an invite for those buying directors to have a front row seat in the "big house" for a reasonable period of time

    the odds of rick barry, especially, doing that are about zero

    they bought on a level field

    their buys were very bullish

    but they did not openly violate basic BOD SEC guidelines

    this is not some penny stock run by bucket shops

    the public forum exposure of their actions would be non stop if material trial data was dropped right after their buys ... the shorts would have a field day

    you say nobody would complain? now that, is more insane than what gary said

    it would be all over yahoo, twitter and investor village, and would find its way directly to theh SEC

    those buying directors and their lawyers all know this, and they would never take such risk, not ever

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 18, 2016 7:23 AM Flag

    dear gary

    your post is insane

    if srpt had any new material trial data ready for release, good or bad, no director could transact in the stock until such data was publicly disclosed

    and it is highly unlikely at this point that any such data would be deemed not material

    I assure you that not one of those buying directors took any measurable risk with their purchases

    they bought on a playing field they and the srpt lawyers deem level

    do directors have a generally advantaged view? of course

    but do not confuse that with buying on non disclosed trial data

    that they bought is obviously bullish for all obvious reasons

    that is good enough without getting crazy about them buying on material info they and not you have

  • Reply to

    Oh dear...

    by masmale1 Mar 17, 2016 4:25 PM
    simp08801 simp08801 Mar 17, 2016 4:26 PM Flag

    you are so wrong

    the stock is going to 130 tomorrow

    just ask them

  • those insiders who bought will not be a position to sell until after the PDUFA date, due to insider trade windows in and around earnings

    thus, they bought for FDA approval, and not just an adcom trade

  • Reply to

    How about these large insiders buys?

    by fundm1969 Mar 17, 2016 2:57 AM
    simp08801 simp08801 Mar 17, 2016 7:15 AM Flag

    No

    It is the opposite

    The insider buys prove out that company has not received any non public material info from FDA

    Revised briefing docs would be mega material

    What those buys do show is director CONFIDENCE

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 16, 2016 5:08 PM Flag

    rats

    as I have previously stated, I believe the FDA's voluntary act of deeming the 4-year data to be a material amendment to the NDA, to be a materially bullish event in the analysis of whether etep could ever be FDA approved

    the FDA had etep DOA on those briefing docs

    it was done, and all FDA had to do was play the clock out

    instead, it made a totally discretionary move to add 90 days on to the process that I am sure the FDA views as pure torture

    WHY would it do that?

    I theorize that somebody at the FDA, somebody with power, said " we can never change our mind in the context of admitting we were wrong, so instead, we will declare a do over based on after acquired facts"!

    whether that senior FDA person who played that card can prevail against the OBVIOUS etep haters at FDA, remains to be seen

    etep was dead, but now it has a flickering heartbeat

    next signal is the adcom questions

    anecdotal evidence means zilch, and less than zilch if the adcom questions do not contrain an approval vote

    FDA will either hang its hat on the 4 year data as an a material inflexion point, or not

    in other words, FDA can blame pre 4-year alleged benefit on placebo, steroids, and cherry picked control group ... BUT at 4 years, FDA can no longer ignore the benefit (changing your mind without changing it ...)

    this post has been approved by tred, whether he knows it or not

  • simp08801 simp08801 Mar 16, 2016 4:53 PM Flag

    dear tred

    you are speaking of the risks of the drug administration

    I am speaking of the risks of assuming the fda will give a rat's bottom about that anecdotal evidence when making its determinations on etep

    the reason you do not see this is because you are an expert on keeping your blinders perfectly positioned on your face

SRPT
21.19-1.01(-4.55%)May 27 4:00 PMEDT