Because the Constitution grands individuals freedom of speech, and that includes stating your opinion. Slander and libel laws also allow for exceptions, including that you believe what you state is true. Proving someone's stated opinion is not their true opinion is not easy, even if common sense indicates that it is the case.
the last two days of action made no sense. PBFX was up 11% on Monday, yet PBF was flat. Today, they are both down 4%. PBF is an misunderstood gem that is going to pay a shareholders almost 5% here, and that dividend looks poised to grow in the coming year, if not within 2014. This is a great long term hold.
You cannot blame management for an industry-wide lack of demand. Buy a few riggers and wait a few years. This situation reverses itself every few years.
It is funny that PBFX went up 11% and PBF ended down on the day, since PBF owns half of PBFX and is getting a pile of cash from the drop down. I mean, beyond that $135 mil, half those units and their increased DCF belong to PBF, and this money looks like it will either fund the repurchase program or support an increased dividend. Honestly, I am torn between PBF and PBFX. They both look misunderstood. I am slightly in favor of PBF, because they should benefit from either appreciation to PBFX or refineries generally.
offshore drillers are possibly more hated. Refining is a good long term business and PBF will be operating at capacity in any environment. They can buy back shares here, and increase the dividend next year.
Whatever total market percentage it is, I am only using the numbers you quoted, and from where you stated there was therefore no way for the company to earn 20 mil from Japanese use. But it is quite possible under your estimates for Keryx to earn 30 mil. It is also possible for the use to expand to new markets (think pre dialysis), as well as for the CKD market to grow. Now, you say 30 mil is not critical, but before 20 mil was critical enough to comment.
Because the big boys are buying right now, and do not want the clients to know yet. This a a juicy peach dangling from a very low branch
a few things,
(1) by your own numbers, keryx nay get 10-15% on 150-200 mil in Japanese revenue. If they got 15 on 200, that would be 30. So, to say there is no way they will get to 20 is contradicted by your numbers. In fact, if 200 in revs, on a 10-15% royalty, they would have to hit 20 as a worst case. Also, all of these numbers do not consider demographics as a likely source of increased patients.
(2) 500 mil is 30% of the current US phosphate binder market, but that market is increasing at a substantial rate (at an epidemic rate among certain subgroups). 30% of the market in 3-4 years will probably be closer to 700-800. Also, being such a differentiated phosphate binder, that could result in reduced need for IV iron, it could easily take 70%, or over twice the numbers.
This article failed to highlight that these patients generally get iron vain an IV 3 times a week for hours at a time, and that monitoring iron is part of the process involved in pumping iron into a patient. Such patients, and even the facilities, will be happy to continue monitoring iron levels and reduce IV iron if possible, and to eliminate it if this drug allows. This is the kind of misunderstanding that can create real opportunity.
You have to add to that the cost of the IV iron and the 6 hours per week (usually 3x for 2 hours at a time). And that time is time taken from the patient's life and slows down turnover at facilities. This means beyond the reduction in IV iron cost, you must factor in the facility's ability to increase its capacity due to reduced IV iron.
If you are in the industry, you know that patients are given iron through an IV, and their blood iron is monitored, which is how they know to keep giving them iron (usually, 2 hours of that 3 times a week). Now, do you really think that this patient in your industry is afraid they may have to stop doing that? They are hoping for a reason to stop, and they have to take a phosphate binder, so why not this one?
But one can compare them, because after taking ferric citrate, many CKD patients will start losing bags and bags of iron infusion every week.
AP article while trading was still halted, stating the slide was due to the warning label. FBR then downgraded it on the same basis. FBR is the source for AP and the Street's criticism. It all seems planted.
Yes, this is a rare opportunity to buy stock in blockbuster new drug that just got approval, and which is somehow 15% lower than it was the day before getting approval. Keep buying if it keeps falling. I am doing 500 shares at a time, every 40-50 cents.
This is a real warning, but to potentially stop IV iron. A warning that you may get so lucky as to stop. Between efficacy and growing kidney problems, this will be making $500mil in a year or two, and probably over $1bil a year before the end of this decade. More, if the use is expanded, which is quite possible.
The article is persuasive to an investor in an armchair, but people with CKD are treated in medical centers, where they are hooked up to dialysis and IVs, and where monitoring iron in your blood is a regular occurrence. Many CKD patients are going to get IV iron a few times a week, for a few hours at a time. This takes time from the patient and the medical center. The value in this pill potentially eliminating some (hopefully much) of the IV iron could be a major cost benefit, but more importantly dramatically add to the patient's quality of life while increasing facility capacity. Telling someone that is getting their iron level checked on a weekly basis to watch their iron is not a serious warning, and both doctors and patents will be hoping to be so lucky.