Biotech / Medical | Immunomedics (IMMU) - moderated


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: idahoranch1 who wrote (9653)4/8/2010 8:15:26 AM
From: tom pope   of 20785
 
What you say is very true. He should be read with skepticism.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: idahoranch1 who wrote (9635)4/8/2010 9:51:20 AM
From: beentheredoneit   of 20785
 
Idaho,

I am afraid that you will not hear any specifics, for one the Immu delegation at these events is probably quite small! On the other hand the biotech area is a small world and people do move around quite a bit, and as a result perception of certain companies spreads as well. Unfortunately, in the end it does not matter if industry's opinion is based on real experience or just perception, because it becomes reality, thus making it difficult to bring competent partners to the table despite having decent compounds in the pipeline.

This seems to be the real conundrum for Immu.

I still remember the reaction of a former CEO when somebody proposed to look into an Immu drug: priceless!

Beentheredoneit

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: beentheredoneit who wrote (9657)4/8/2010 10:13:43 AM
From: idahoranch1   of 20785
 
I am quite certain one wouldn't hear specifics from IMMU's side, one way or the other. They hold things tight to the vest.

So if those things are "going around" it is the upper echelon of companies like J&J and Eli Lilly that can't keep their mouths shut about failed deals. If they can't keep quiet about failed deals, then they likely can't keep quiet about a lot of things.

Think that is the case?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: idahoranch1 who wrote (9658)4/8/2010 10:52:35 AM
From: corndog   of 20785
 
Reminds me of two axioms: (1) just because someone says something, it doesn't make it true and (2) after all is said and done more gets said than done

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: dorightbythem4/8/2010 12:31:27 PM
   of 20785
 
Nycomed 2009 Annual Report is out. Not much there.

nycomednews.com 

Apparently not many fans of Shakespeare out there. Sorry I missed with that post. Oh well.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: idahoranch14/8/2010 12:59:38 PM
   of 20785
 
In a 10-5 decision, an FDA expert panel voted against approval of Daxas, Forest Laboratories and Nycomed's drug for chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). The panel did vote 9-6 that the drug is safe and effective. "The benefit of this drug, although is there, it's meager," noted one panelist. That benefit obviously wasn't enough to warrant the panel's backing, as many thought the side effects of Daxas outweighed the limited improvement in lung function. An FDA decision is due in May, and although the agency doesn't have to follow the panel's recommendations, it generally does.

Forest could gain approval of the the drug for a narrower group of patients, rather than the broad COPD indication. "We believe there is still room for us to begin and go forward with negotiations with the agency," said Forest President and COO Lawrence Olanoff.

Nycomed, which developed the drug, conducted four Phase III trials of Daxas and got a $100 million upfront payment from Forest for the licensing deal last year. The company stood to gain an additional $500 million in milestones for the drug, which has blockbuster potential if it can compete with GSK's mega-seller Advair.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: idahoranch1 who wrote (9661)4/8/2010 1:36:57 PM
From: dorightbythem   of 20785
 
You may appreciate the timing of this Fool article.

fool.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: dorightbythem who wrote (9662)4/8/2010 2:28:33 PM
From: me otter   of 20785
 
We have only traded 200+ thousand shares today. That kind of volume would suggest that the sell pressure is not present, making things a bit problematic for the short interest.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: me otter who wrote (9663)4/8/2010 4:06:31 PM
From: idahoranch1   of 20785
 
Granted it is speculation, but it looks to me like the shorts get very concerned when the stock moves to or above $3.60. When it gets to that area, the pattern that has been used to short the stock down and hold it appears. If they are trying to cover, they aren't having a lot of luck if they are defending their position at the $3.60 level and may be shorting more than buying on some days.
That suits me just fine.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: idahoranch1 who wrote (9664)4/8/2010 7:31:39 PM
From: me otter   of 20785
 
From a chart point of view, the downtrend from mid-january is broken and any move above the $3.60 area will give the buyers another reason to add. It would make sense for the bears to try to keep it below this area.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.