>>I'm also frustrated with the delays in the diagnostic launch, but what are the alternatives?<<
Good question. Predicant and Correlogic look dead in the water again, not a peep for 8 months or more. Power3, however is still out there. They forged an alliance with Biosite last summer, which rather chaps me, because Ciphergen formed one of those, too, and we have heard absolutely zip about that. I assume the CIPH/BSTE collaboration is dead. OTOH, Power3 is only going after some of the same tests, I.E. an AD test seems to be their frontrunner.
And I forgot that CIPH is pursuing an HCV test hot and heavy enough to have inlicensed some biomarkers from 3rd parties, a pretty sure sign of seriousness. So that may be their big internal program.
>>Ciphergen is the frontrunner so if it means 6-9 months at the current entry level($1.65) the risk vs reward looks great.<<
Yeah, that's why I'm not selling. Last summer, when it appeared Correlogic might still be in the hunt, I was more concerned about the lost time in the ovarian arena. But as much as CIPH's test has been pushed out, so has everyone else's.
Nevertheless, the thing that really chapped me about the CC was not the secrecy about where Quest was in getting this sucker out there -- I was expecting at least some vagueness -- but the backpedal on the route to commercial development. That is, as I've said, there were hopes that the test could be commercialized as an Analyte Specific Reagent. The regulatory hurdles of that approach are lower and more quickly jumped. I read the regulations about it, and about 510k submissions, and when I talked to management about this issue, they gave me the impression that the former was a plausible path. To hear Bill Sullivan talk this afternoon, with no mention of the ASR route at all, worries me a bit. If they have to do a 510k submission, their projection of launching this year could still be optimistic.
But since my Mom owns some on my recommendation at a bit over $2, I guess I'll be patient. Though we need to keep an eye on the cash situation. With timelines stretching before they see any revenue from this stuff, burn is again a concern.
Edit: Oh, and the other thing that bugs me a bit . . . the three tests that they were developing? Turn out to be variations on the ovarian theme. Somehow I got the feeling last year they were for other diseases altogether, and I don't think Ciphergen was too clear about that until now.
Cheers, Tuck |
