CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, Va. (WTVR) – Federal agents raided the Midlothian office of Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals Tuesday. The office is in the Fairfax Building located at 10710 Midlothian Turnpike.
“We can confirm that federal officers from the US government presented a search warrant at the offices of Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,” company spokesman Tony Brand wrote in an email. “RB is cooperating fully with the investigation, but the officials did not disclose the purpose of the warrant.”
The raid involved the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Food and Drug Administration and Office of Inspector General (OIG), according to CBS 6 reporter Joe St. George who was on the scene. OIG is part of part of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.
“People who work in the building say it is a pharmaceutical company getting raided,” St. George tweeted. [Click here to follow Joe on Twitter]
Federal officials on site did not comment regarding the specifics of the raid.
According to its website, RB is an international company specializing in health and consumer items, although its Chesterfield office dealt exclusively with pharmaceutical drugs.
Reuters reported in November that the company was considering selling its pharmaceutical unit.
The New York Times reported earlier this year the FDA asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate the company’s potentially anti-competitive business practices.
It is unclear whether or not Tuesday’s raid was related to that request or not.
RB’s office occupies just one small part of the medical office building.
Employees in other parts of the building reported the work day for them was relatively a smooth one with investigators focusing solely on RB’s office.
You can see video of the story at Chesterfield TV station - googel "feds raid beckitt renckiser" and you can get to the link
I like your post, beatle, and feel much the same way. I don't think being half-empty is the problem. I just think the galss isn't really that big, unfortunately. I can see it running up on some kind of choatic emotion, but there will only be a select few who get orders executed up there. It seems to always work that way......... If a person could by now at.$80 and sell at $1.50, they will have done very well, I think. GLTA!
If the stock might be worth "10 folds", then that would suggest the probability of approval is very, very low. That would be the way I see it.
If a buyout were announced and the pricing terms were specific, the price of DNDN would immediately reflect this value, discounted a little bit for timing until the day of the event.
1) You could hold your shares for a check (if a cash deal) or for shares of the acquiring company.
2) You could sell at any time
3) I don't believe there is a "tax event" until you sell any shares or receive cash payment from a "cash" deal.
Others may add to this, as I may have overlooked something, but that's what I think would happen.
Thanks for the reply, baffle. I see your point, having read the report several times since your post. I will admit it doesn't seem quite as clear to me that his pricing suggests no new trials, reading with a more jaundiced eye, but I still believe it does. It just seems to me that new trials would imply more dilution, more time and more certainly of the trial results. I guess it would be possible that the trial results could be unfavorable and I'm not sure where that would leave Probuphine's approval prospects. I would hope it wouldn't prevent it, but only make the dosage issue more clearly understood. I don't really know........ GLTA!
1) If you are working on a deal, like the one with Braeburn, with some lead time
2) If you know you will be getting $5,000,000 for "x number" of shares
3) If you know its shares will be based on a particular day's closing price
4) If you wanted to "walk the price down" via manipulation to allow the buyer to accumulate more shares because of the cheaper price on that particular day
5) If you believe in manipulation
6) I assume this could be done, especially in a lightly-traded stock
7) Was it? I don't know, of course, but I can see it plausible.
8) It is what it is, as they say, but what the heck is IT?
NO CLUE, as to why it surged. Your suggestion of a leak and relationship between the surge and recent Braeburn arrangements is certainly plausible, I think. I think we can all agree that the "mugging" by the FDA to prevent what seemed to be a well-deserved approval, combined with CRL (Type C, what does IT mean) and the length of time that has passed, makes decision-making very difficult right now.......at least, more difficult than when we following a "path to approval" that was a little more clear. GLTA!
You make a good point about the volume and the price surge to $1.20+ range.
Not that anything ever is, but this rise wasn't "clear" to any of us on the board, as best I can recall.
There was much speculation as to what was going on, but there was no consensus on any reason among most of the long-timers around here.
Of course, the "manipulation" postualte was invoked, as always.
For me, I have
matthew.....I understand and appreciate your sentiments.
It appears that the "market" feels the same way as Braeburn does because the stock price, despite the bit of dilution, is not significantly different that Braeburn's purchase. Now, for such a small and thinly traded stock as TTNP, I am assume that the "market" is "efficient" and is attempting to value TTNP. I recognize that his might be a ludicrous assumption, of course, but it's really all I go on, if I try to apply mathematical logic to TTNP's stock price. GOOD LUCK to you with TTNP.
Lastly, implied in this theoretical 55% would be that if:
1) If you think chances of approval with no new trials is GREATER than 55%, then you would be more inclined to purchase TTNP right now.
2) If you think chances of approval with no new trials is LESS than 55%, then you would be less inclined to purchase TTNP right now and might decide to wait until after the minutes are released.
Just my thoughts....................which, along with $2.00, will get you a Sunday Newspaper. :-)
$.83 is 55% of $1.50
That was my logic.
Example: If we were at $1.35, then I would conclude we were at 90% of JN's expected value (based on approval without new trials). The 90% would be so close that it would suggest approval is imminent and "baked in" so to speak.
It looks to me now, that our price indicates that it's a coin toss (50/50), more or less, than TTNP will not have new trials and will be approved on the re-submission. That is NOT a fact, but only what the pricing "suggests" to me. Please know that, as ALWAYS, I reserve the right to be 100% wrong in everything I've stated in this regard. I don't pretend to know and will defer that Napodano should know FAR more than I do. GLTA!
1) You are right I am still here because I'm interested in buying back.
2) I'm also here because I've been here for over 4.5 years, pretty much non-stop, and I'm addicted to the board and following the TTNP saga.
3) My post was to share how I interpretted the article that Napodano wrote and what it inferred to me about how to buy, sell, or hold going forward.
4) Yes, I would like to own TTNP when it gets approved, just because it would provide a sense of being "right" if you will, regardless of what kind of profit (or even loss) I might realize.
5) Anyone who might draw any inferrences about why I meant or why I sold, can feel free to ask me here. I'll tell them as honestly as I can, just like I did the day I posed that I sold.
6) For what it's worth, I don't and have NEVER felt that I'm posting for "newbies" as a general rule. I tend to post (share) with the folks who I think have shared in the true spirit of the board.
7) I can't worry about unintended consequences that I can hardly get myself to believe would occur based on anything I have posted or ever will. My game isn't that strong, quite frankly, and I've got the losses to prove it.
8) Anyone can ask me anyting at any time and I'll be as honest as I can be in reply.
Lastly, if I do make a decision to buy back in, if the price WERE to retreat in the next few days, it only makes sense that I would be pleased to see this occur. Nut like I said earlier, even then, I'm not sure if I would buy back in or not. Why? Because I"m not sure quite what to think of Probuphine's chances of approval without new trials just yet. I never felt better about PB than after the AdCom and waiting for approval. The "mugging" has totally made me IGNORANT, effectively in regard to the future. True enough...... GLTA!
Please explain what you mean by this. My understanding is that his price was based on approval coming without new trials. Effectively, by comparing the current price to his "expected" price, all I was suggesting was that implicit in the numbers was a 55% chance of Probuphine being approved with no new tirals. Mine was an attempt, lame or otherwise, at trying to construct a decision-making model for assessing the potential return versus the "probability" of it happening. I recognize that I may well be totally out to lunch and very wrong, but it was an honest attempt. GLTA!
I can't agree more with your sentiments, jt. OF COURSE. Probuphine has my support whether I own it or not. Why wouldn't it? It represents a wonderful alternative treatment for folks, like my barber who has been thrown back in jail now for a relapse and missed his parole, who would like to beat this dreaded disease. As I mentioned months ago, when I told him about Probphine, he told me that is sounded like a GREAT idea and one that he would like to use. That's the closest personal experience I've had with potential patients and it was a very sincere endorsement by him. GLTA!
Beatle: If you are inferring that I'm trying to assist me to do anything, you are 100% wrong. Like I have always done, I have tried to share thoughts based on the information I have and how I process it. My post was more a MATHEMATICAL POST than anything else, trying to boil the expected return (vis-a-vis the probability of it) into a decision-making model. That's it. My only inference about a lower price is that, there would be a chance that people would irrationally react to not hearing any news that we have already been told not to expect. This happens all the time and I've seen it. I have NEVER INTENTIONLLY tried to INTENTIONALLY MAKE it happen or contribute to it happening. What sucks about these boards is when a person has always been honest, because there is so much dishonesty here, people become skeptical of everyone.........even those who post in the true spirit of the board.
1) Based on the stock's discounted value of $1.50, according to Jason Napodano.
2) Based on his valuation assuming no new trals.
3) Based on the assumption that no new trials implies approval of a re-filed NDA.
4) Based on the stock being "fairly" valued at $.83 currently.
5) If you think the proability of no new trials is at least 55%, then you buy at the current price now.
There is the chance that, if no news of the meeting is released this week, the price could retreat because of apprehension, caution, fear, uncertainty, etc...... If so, based on he above, there is increased potential "value" buying before the 19th of December, when minutes are expected to be released.
This may be faulty logic, but this is kinda the way I see it, based on JN's report.
JN assumes a 35% rate to start in 2017. He is conservative here, because he does not know the stratification of the current NOL carryforward for TTNP. According to the YaHoo profile, TTNP was founded in 1992.
The basic rules for using an NOL are:
1.Carry the amount back to the preceding two tax years and apply it against any taxable income, which can generate an immediate tax rebate. You can waive this action and instead proceed directly to the next step; if so, attached a statement to your tax return in the year in which the NOL was generated, documenting the waiver.
2.Carry the amount forward for the next 20 years and apply it against any taxable income, which reduces the amount of taxable income in those years.
3.After 20 years, any remaining NOL is cancelled.
It makes financial sense to apply the NOL against the earliest periods possible, since the time value of money dictates that the tax savings in these periods is more valuable than for any tax savings in later periods.
If NOLs are being generated in multiple years, use them in the order the NOLs were generated. This means that the earliest NOL should be completely drawn down before the next oldest NOL is accessed. This approach reduces the risk that an NOL will be terminated by the 20-year rule noted earlier.