Jack, I respect your opinions but I have to disagree. Looking back at post 735, #735 tried to evaluate IPIC on the basis of citicoline, which it made a case for valuating citicoline as worth about one-third of the value of Redux by stating "My estimate is that the Citicoline market is at most one third of what Redux's could have been (i.e., there are many more obese people - including those who could not get into their favorite pair of pants, and used the drug against its intended use, than people with stroke).
Suppose now that Citicoline was already approved and already shipping
with a similar royalty schedule as Redux......"
Without going into great detail at this time, citicoline is going to be huge compared to Redux.......... comparing a market for an overpriced anti-obesity drug in a marketplace full of them (if one even enters the market), vs. a drug for ischemic stroke for which there is minimal competition currently and not much else in pipelines which is anywhere close to it in development........and comparing a "similar royalty schedule", when AHP was co-licensee and major revenue receptor, vs. citicoline which is cheap to produce and "all ours".
Post 736 was a reprint of the Barron's article, gave us another nice kick in the side, although was totally farfetched......if you want to valuate IPIC via Barron's, be afraid....be very afraid!
I think we have awhile to climb back, but citicoline NDA is expected in about a month, and the horrors of the Redux story just aren't so scary anymore......all the panickers have gone home, and the story will defuse to a great deal over the next 3 months.......starting Friday morning maybe, when the CEO of AHP will be on CNBC's Squawkbox (between 8 and 9 AM EST, I believe).
Have to go pick up son from soccer practice, will leave with an interesting post from Motley Fool regarding a liability scenario for IPIC:
<<Subject: Re: I love IPIC!!!!!
Date: Sun, Oct 5, 1997 20:07 EDT
From: CrazyW4004
Message-id: <19971006000801.UAA17660@ladder02.news.aol.com>
Give it up RichM. Now you're really reaching. 'Nuf said to you.
On 9/30 Ffio wrote:
<<DLJ still maintains a strong buy, but target is now only 15-16>>
Nothing could be further from the truth. I have quite a bit of cash with both DLJ and Lehman and neither, as of 10/3/97, have changed their price targets. DLJ still maintains a 12 month $40 target and Lehman has a 12 month $33 target. Perhaps Ffio has other motives? Or was erroneously informed.
Let's say that this is the year 2001 and there is a $5 billion settlement reached in this bogus (IMHO) Fen/Phen fiasco. There are 10 defendants. How is it split? Pondimin is obviously held about 70% liable (it's been around a lot longer and a lot more supposed heart abnormalities occured with it) Redux is 30% liable (1.5B). What percentage does AHP pay?
What percentage do the other defendants pay? I say AHP is responsible for 70% (conservative), The other defendants about 15% (conservative) IPIC is responsible for 15% (exaggerated) That would mean IPIC has to come up with $225 million. By that time, Citicoline is doing $617 million/year (conservative according to DLJ) and another 100-200 million from bucindolol and who knows what else on top of that. And this is IF there is liability (a big IF)
and IF it is $5,000,000,000!>>
|
