Biotechnology Value Fund, L.P. Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Biotechnology Value Fund, L.P.

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Thomas M. who wrote (1703)	5/31/2000 3:09:00 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	of 4974

Saw it, thanks. If that second author is Rich van den Broek, recently ex-H&Q, that's bizarre. I look at the same data and come to an entirely different conclusion. I often use public info to judge when to be in or out of an issue as it goes to advisory committee. Lots of us do. I've been wrong on one GILD meeting and on the DEPO embarrassment. Why can't it just be assumed that others do the same?? This abstract seems to imply that public info. makes it simply an issue of flipping a coin. That's absurd, as most data is released to the public before advisory committee meetings, and one can tell a ton about the likely outcome of phase III trials from earlier trials and/or preclinical work. Companies take good projects to advisory committee, and they take bad projects to advisory committee. There is plenty of public information available to judge the projects, and some individuals can do it well. OTOH, there obviously is pronounced insider trading in biotech, no question about it. Unfortunately, it's usually among companies that rarely or never get to phase III trials or to AC. Leaky companies have often been labeled as such here at SI.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next