Sold half in Q3, the rest in Q4. Jennison Assoc had bought over one million shares in Q3 and sold completely out of their position in Q4. Lord Abbett, among the largest investors since 2012, went from almost 3.3 million shares in Q1 14 to 0 at the end of the year. There are some new names, and some familiar ones have doubled down on their positions. Net loss of .964 million shares in Q4, .641 in Q3, .346 in Q2, .736 in Q1. Were some of the big boys so frustrated and disgusted that they vowed to tamper their losses by going short?
Let's not split hairs. 24 wks was the first time a treatment effect (dystrophin) became apparent. That's the time you start writing the application. By 36wks the walk test showed the substantial improvement on a clinically significant endpoint. Update your application and call FedEx.
"A breakthrough therapy designation is for a drug that treats a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement on a clinically significant endpoint(s) over available therapies."
Etep met the criteria after 24 wks. BTD would have made partnering much easier, and conditions more favorable for Sarepta. With BTD and a FDA-wise partner there is no way it would have taken 3 yrs for Ph3 to begin. No way FDA was compelled to publish a letter pointing their finger for delays at sponsor. No way sponsor still not sure what FDA wants. Likely on the market now.
The BOD is part of the problem. Garabedian said a few years ago that one of his conditions for accepting the CEO position was that he was not required to partner Etep because the product was too good to give part of it away. Mind you that was before the 12 patient study had even begun. BOD should have known better and kept all options open. Without doubt a partner with strong regulatory competence could have been signed after 48 wk data were published and the FDA quagmire be avoided. 3 yrs later SRPT still not sure what the FDA wants? What???
Let us not forget that 3 yrs ago CG was asked if Sarepta had applied for BT status. No, they hadn't he said, and in a manner that has exemplified his leadership style he explained that it wasn't necessary because Sarepta was getting so much attention already from the FDA BT status wouldn't provide any benefit.
Among 41 new drugs approved in 2014 9 had BT designation. An industry insider and head of a pharma think tank commented: "There is no question that the BT designation delivered 9 approvals that would otherwise still be in the pipeline". Another job well done by SRPT CEO.
Additional clarification for those who care and have the capacity to understand: six investment vehicles of the Blackrock family added 603,150 shares in Q4, for a total of 3,202,261 shares. The last available filing from Blackrock is for 12/31/14.
I am currently seeing Q4 filings for 107 institutions, missing another 60 or so. Net share loss is at 1.22 million.
I didn't "feel" shares were dumped. I reported on actual numbers for end of Q4 2014. You are better at being a horse's #$%$ and calling people names than managing your investments.
About 70 institutions have reported end of Q4 holding. There is a net loss of 2.45 million shares. Dennison Assoc, over 1 million shares dumped, position closed. Lord Abbett, almost 700,000 shares sold, position closed. Commerzbank, 521,000 shares, position closed. And so on. Largest reported buy so far is 350,000 shares.
Only a fraction of institutional holders, 1/5 perhaps, have reported their 12/31/14 holdings. Among these there is a net loss of 1.55 million shares. Large Q4 sales came from Kornitzer (-480,000), Commerzbank (-521,000, closed), Emerald Advisers (-400,000, closed), Emerald Mutual (-217,000, closed).
While it is possible that SGEN will have a bright future but I am concerned that investor focus has turned away from ADCs and toward CAR-T. It is very hard for a stock to shake off negative sentiment even though business results may be very respectable.
If this was a fine company as you say the management would have not screwed up a) the pricing of Viekira and b) the subsequent steep discount which have led to a tragic 10 Billion loss in market value. Pricing Viekira right at a sensible discount to Harvoni would have produced the sales ABBV wants and avoided the price war with Gilead which ultimately will hit ABBV harder than GILD because GILD has the superior product and the leeway to match ABBVs stupid discounts.
Sarepta drug wasn't used in the biggest Ebola outbreak in history. Hard to believe but several experimental drugs with less safety and animal efficacy data were used. Whatever the reason for those decisions, why would anybody think Sarepta drug still has a chance to produce value in the future? I am going one step further. Antiviral programs based on morpholino antisense with its high cost and need for injection are not going to create value. Better deploy your resources in different disease areas.
Isis is a demonstration of what valuation can be achieved while the biotech sector is super hot even if your commercial prospects remain doubtful. As long as you have consistent leadership that is able to instill confidence in investors you're on.
Found it, thank you! It doesn't say what the time frame is, just previous quarter vs. current quarter. Information I have from a different service shows only about a dozen institutions have reported their end of Q4 ownership. In this non representative sample there is a net change of -1.12 million shares compared to end of Q3.
NOT. They want suckers to buy shares. Like Blackrock. Like the poor saps who shelled out $38 a share last April. So much anger. How does the remaining management even deal with it? No new directors, no CSO. Will someone please step up and take this train wreck private? With a decent makeover it could return 10x in 3 yrs.