<tell me whether you think I am all wet?>
The biotech sector is not wildly overvalued if
you beleive that biotechs are the primary pipeline
for therapeutics, and that big pharma does not
own most of this pipe.
I suppose a person could wait until each biotech's
R&D pays off--but wouldn't you have rather bought,
say, IMNX before it had any drugs on the market?
So that is the trick I think--to find biotechs that
are more likely to produce drugs and therapies but
are not yet valued for that probability. Sometimes
you can get a biotech with products and the R&D for
free--Gliatech might be a good example there.
__
I'll bet if I surveyed each of the biotech
contributors that I have 'peoplemarked' and
asked them for specific details why they own
what they do, I would get back some really
terrific ideas. A person could build a decent
biotech portfolio with that approach. Instead,
what you see are public posts with all the
answers, but they're hard to find with all the
noise generated inbetween. (I am one of the noisy
guys, it helps to cover up all good advice and
then just keyword search back to the answers <g>).
You ask about The Motley Fool's take...
I don't think they are emphasizing the right
part of the equation "business models". A genomics
company has the first crack finding the targets.
A billion dollar company, hmmm, Genset comes to
mind. I think it is unlikely that the sort of
research that Genset does with genomics data,
mapping, pharmacogenomics and such, wont lead
to a billion dollar drug, maybe a number of
billion dollar drugs, in the years ahead. |
