My take on this is..Sometimes a company can't afford to pay a pretty valuable new employee
the kind of money that they can make otherwise,,so they pay them in exercisable stock grants
which permit the employee to sell a portion upon a milestone..(which may be forthcoming, or
already arrived) and they receive the proceeds in lieu of salary..The one sale might be that, and
the other to cover the taxes incurred on the first..I have a couple of other holdings that have done
the same thing..I didn't connect those dots until I talked to IR...
Ok, so here we are..with a bunch of curious posts flying around,,I thought I'd throw out some softballs..
First..some want to have us believe this might not work..we might not get the regulatory approvals we need.
Nonsense...First of all,,A large investment firm just paid almost 250,000,000.00 (zeros thrown in for effect)
for about 11% of the outstanding shares...Now who makes a decision like that on a hunch? NO ONE..
Secondly..the company has added some of the most prominent names in the field,,folks that could have gone
anywhere,,and previously held big positions with companies in the arena,,and they left to come to INSM..
Are they all of a sudden stupid,,,NOT LIKELY...Third..the company is ramping up the most involved and
efficient structure of people, production, facilities, and logistics you will find to service their offerings..Who
would assemble such a consortium if they where not more than confident of an approval, and a need...
NO ONE.. As a shareholder, I am pretty confident I am sitting on one of the best return vehicles I've ever
seen...We may get bought out,,and that's highly likely,,but it won't be cheap...Too many signs point to
WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal health regulators have questions about the benefits of an experimental combination drug for cystic fibrosis developed by Vertex Pharmaceuticals, including whether the addition of a second drug ingredient adds to the pill's effectiveness.
The Food and Drug Administration said in an online review that the drug improved breathing in patients with the deadly inherited disease, but that the effect was small.
About 30,000 Americans live with cystic fibrosis, a disease that causes sticky mucus buildup in the lungs and other organs, leading to infections, digestive problems and early death. In the 1950s, children with cystic fibrosis seldom survived long enough to complete elementary school. Due to improvements in care, the typical cystic fibrosis patient today can expect to survive into their early 40s, according to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
there appears to be a general rotation out of biotech at this time..A lot of this is window dressing
for the month end..Nothing material has changed at INSM, to the contrary, things to me actually
look better. All this short move will do is pry some shares from weaker hands short term..
Whoever you are,,you just committed a serious crime. I will be calling INSM in the morning to have them
consider filing charges against you...I will now post the correct press release which has nothing to do with
INSM..I will see you in serious distress..
AstraZeneca Plc's diabetes drug Onglyza may be associated with an increased rate of death, according to a preliminary review of data by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The FDA's report, posted on the agency's website on Friday, comes ahead of an April 14 meeting of an FDA advisory panel to discuss the safety of Onglyza and a similar drug from Takeda Pharmaceutical Co called Nesina. Onglyza won U.S. approval in 2009 and Nesina in 2013.
A trial of more than 16,000 patients known as SAVOR previously showed patients taking Onglyza, also known as saxagliptin, had an increased risk of hospitalization due to heart failure.
The agency's analysis found the heart failure risk to be valid, and also identified a possible increased risk of death from all causes.
The overall trial results did not reveal a higher death risk, but a more detailed analysis examining only patients who took the drug suggests "a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality," the review found.
The FDA said the causes of death were often "multifactorial" and some patients may have had several serious medical conditions prior to death.
Still, the FDA said it "is not reassured" by the increased risk, "and we do not necessarily view this pattern of variable causes as evidence the mortality signal is due to chance."
Rook,,,If you take a closer look,,it appears as though the tutes where only in for 42% lf the stock..
regardless,,they missed three periods of endpoints.. I think their dance card is punched,,
I personally don't think the negative posts are Terry's..I think it's someone else. Could be someone we all
know well..A board troll if you will..Terry is too damn smart for this, and why would he use fake screen names
when he can post counter views under his own well known screen name..This is just my opinion, and it's
worth what you paid for it..
Boy, I sure hope so,,,but I kinda doubt it..Maybe you should take a minute out to
see what this investment is all about..This isn't about the price of oil..This is about
pipelines,,Regardless of the price of oil..they still have to pay to move it....What?
You didn't know that?
If we would all take a minute to reflect on the past 10 days..someone with a lot of money just came in and
made a pretty bold statement. They have basically said this company is going to be worth a lot of money and they backed it up with 235,000.000.00 reasons. This does put a pretty strong floor under this stock, and give me the impression that deep pockets are convinced this business model is sound. There is a possibility none of us here really understand what we have. Whoever put up this kind of money, didn't do it on a whim, or on a hope and a prayer..They did their research,, and their own analytics..
You're all missing the most important part..A buyout will not be based on what you want, or the house you want to own..It will be based on what revenue the indication can produce, over what period of time prior to patents running out, minus the expense to bring the product to market it. It's that simple. All the institutional investors look at it that way, and we should too.
If the compounding of revenue, margins, and expenses compute to a value of 60 based on the time value of money (investment), that's what we will see. If the indication shows the capacity to produce for 15 years at or near a billion a year then do your own math..based on the number of shares outstanding,
(which keeps changing) I hold more than most outside the tutes. I'm not here for a vacation home,,,already got one..
I'm here for the kids, and grandkids,,and the vacation home they don't have
What all here have to consider is this move isn't because INSM wanted to, it's because the suitor that is wanting to take this out basically asked INSM to finance a portion of their own takeover.
With this move INSM now has the vast majority of the funds necessary to bring this drug, and it's delivery system to market world wide. This is even more a ready made business model complete with all necessary financing already done. INSM is now plug and play..Also in doing this INSM is now in position to be able to be bought out for the kind of number than may satisfy many large holders..This will cause the stock price to move up, and will put the company in play..INSM did this because it's friggen brilliant...wait and see...