Fri, Jul 25, 2014, 5:58 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 3 hrs 32 mins


% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Omeros Corporation (OMER) Message Board

tredleon 106 posts  |  Last Activity: 13 hours ago Member since: Sep 21, 1999
  • tredleon tredleon May 1, 2014 9:37 PM Flag

    I'm always fascinated when people take the time to post some detailed bashing of a stock that, just by making a couple of clicks, is easily discovered to be total BS. Chegg had $137M of cash and investments (inc $24M of long-term investments) at the end of 2013 and at the end of the most recent quarter that number was $131M (inc $37M of long-term investments), so they used up $6M during the quarter. At that pace, they have about 5 years worth of cash, but given the growth in the digital business, they will probably be cash flow positive by the end of this year. Your humble opinion is garbage - did you even look at the press release before you made up this story? LMFAO douchebag!

  • tredleon tredleon May 1, 2014 1:44 PM Flag

    kart - yes, I am still in FOLD and will hopefully be taking on more before the 2nd Phase III trial results are announced - people have written off Migalistat, due to the messed up statistical analysis used in the 6-month results of the first Phase III trial, but that is a mistake. It will ultimately be approved and will generate substantial revenue, because (1) it is an oral drug, versus IV infusions required for enzyme replacement and (2) enzyme replacement poses a lot of issues with dosing and immune responses. The one overhang on the company is that it will take at least 3 years before any of the their "next generation" ERT#$%$ the market, so they will need a lot more cash to get there, and because of the skepticism over Migalistat, they may need to raise money at dilutive prices?

  • tredleon tredleon May 1, 2014 10:31 AM Flag

    Exactly - in 1st line pancreatic cancer, median PFS with Gem is about 3-4 months and OS is about 7-8 months. Abraxane added less than 2 months to that equation and was approved. The 1.9 months improvement in OS for MM-398 is a more dramatic increase to the 2nd line equation - i.e. a 50% improvement vs a 25% improvement for Abraxane in 1st line. As some other posters pointed out, given that the 1.9 month improvement was statistically significant at P

  • Reply to


    by dutchfinanceguy May 1, 2014 8:51 AM
    tredleon tredleon May 1, 2014 9:58 AM Flag

    Makes sense - given the funk the biotech market is in, most of my holdings are trading at about 40% of analyst estimates. It is hard to rationalize values at times - this stock was trading over $8 about 18 months ago - the pipeline has advanced dramatically since then and they are within a year of generating significant revenues with MM-398. So, was it a case of crazy buyers 18 months ago or is it crazy sellers today?

  • Reply to

    what worries me

    by e11ndofwar Apr 29, 2014 12:53 PM
    tredleon tredleon Apr 30, 2014 6:10 PM Flag

    The interesting thing about your "disappointing" estimate of $10.1M is that it is right in line with analyst estimates of $10.3M, which is consistent with the company's 40% revenue growth target for 2014 - Q1 of 2013 revenue was $7.3M. No doubt there could be some seasonality in the placement/sales number for equipment, as Q4 is traditionally the strongest month for hospital equipment sales, but if they do less than Q4 2013's revenue of $10.7M, that will be the first time in over a couple of years without quarterly sequential growth. I think there is enough momentum in the recurring/kit sales to keep the sequential revenue growth train going, so I like your $11.5M revenue number. What the share price does with that number, who knows - we are at a very fickle time for the market, in general, and biotech even more - a lot of low volume, high volatility days?

  • tredleon tredleon Apr 27, 2014 7:52 PM Flag

    I always had the sense that CG thought dystrophin was more important for future Exons and the "class approval" objective, where finding even a dozen boys on the edge of losing ambulation with these smaller Exon populations would be difficult in order to prove clinical benefit. Ultimately, if the ten Exon 51 boys are still stable over the next couple of years, then I think they can make the "correlation" that 30%+ (after 48 weeks) of positive dystrophin fibers (or whatever measurement they end up validating) equates to long-term clinical benefit, then they just show the same level of dystrophin production (in boys of any age/ambulation status) for future Exons in order to get approval.

14.05-0.30(-2.09%)Jul 24 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.