<<Why are you so defensive of the Goldenbergs>>
If you can objectivity look at what I say, you will see that I'm defensive of the truth. I don't defend them where they aren't defensible, if I do, show me, everything I've written on this board for all these years is there. I'm for the truth good and bad.
<<I realize you have had a personal relationship over the years with them, but that should not shut out other posters opinions>>
It's nothing like you imagine it is. The most I ever talked to Dr. Goldenberg was when my granddaughter was 4 years old and had a tumor on her brain stem and I was looking for anything that might be out there to address that. She responded amazingly to her surgery at the University of Utah medical center. She just turned 15 yesterday and is in all honers classes and is doing great. I don't ever shut out anyone's opinions, but I will challenge statements of fact that are not true or can't be backed up. What's the bad in that?
<< After 30 years of no sales as pointed out by others, I think it's time to make them put up or shut up>>
Don't you think approvals have to happen first? If they hired a sales oriented team now, what would they sell? What they sell, and they HAVE is compounds to bigger companies who are supposed to take them to approval. They've done that. Amgen paid $18 million, UCB paid $38 million, Nycomed paid $60 million, UCB paid another $30 million and we expect another $30 million from them any day. It has not all been on the backs of shareholders. Add in grants over the years and that would add up to almost $200 million, with a market cap of $250 million that's significant. Those numbers are facts. So is the stock price, and that is certainly a big negative, I can't and won't argue it isn't.
<<I know you won't agree but your answer to my last post was ludicrous.>>
What did I say that was ludicrous.
Watch, I REALLY hope the stock moves to where you come out on it, I hope it moves past where you would sell it so quickly that you get to sell at a higher price than you would if it inches up. I think it can, I think E-mab is going to be the near term driver IF some things happen that force the shorts out. It does appear that UCB is enrolling patients more quickly than what they had estimated, that is a good thing. It cuts down the time by a lot that the shorts have to cover if they don't want to be holding millions of shares short when the data comes out that could cost them over $100 million. If the top line data is anything like the aborted phase lll data or the dose ranging data, it will be obvious that E-mab is nothing like benlysta, that it is much better and will sell better. Sure it could disappoint, that is the bet, but it isn't a smart short bet and I don't think they will be in that bet come data presenting day. In fact, institutions or hedge funds will likely start getting in well ahead of that day and one just never knows when that starts to happen. |
