<<1. Why don't you think TXB is an expert in the field of "computer-aided small molecule drug design"? When you visited the company, what kind of equipment were they using? What kind of equipment do you expect an expert in their field should use? Can you give me an example of a good company in the field of "computer-aided small molecule drug design"? And pardon me if sounds stupid, what is "computer-aided small molecule drug design"?>>
To put it simply, think of the old ball and stick method of molecular modelling. This type of modelling is now performed using complex 3-D CAD software which not only helps the scientist visualize the shape of the molecule, but through the uses of complex algorithms and databases, aids in determining pharmacological effects. Every legitimate drug company (e.g. Amgen, Merck, etc.) is involved in this type of research. From all I've been able to dig up, TXB is structured much like ZONA and ARNX, i.e. they are simply shell companies that do not really perform in-house research but act more like VARs, buying old drugs and worthless patents and then touting them in slightly different forms. Note that in all of TXB's press releases regarding Novastan, they continually fail to mention that the active ingredient was actually licensed. They have also obfuscated results of their clinical trails. It is 100% certain that Novastan will not be approved as an alternative for heparin.
<<2. Two analysts from Lehman Brother, Dr. Butler and Mr. Rouse, started to cover TXB with a "Strong Buy" rating about 8 month ago. As I understand, they are reputable analysts and have very good track records. They even played the major roles in the secondary offering of TXB. Why do you think they are willing to risk their reputation and creer in a scam company TBC, especially such a small company?>>
I think you answered your own question by pointing out that they played major roles in the secondary offering. This is all about money and has nothing to do with good science.
<<3. About the FDA review. You said 'A lot is made of the "priority review" process.' What percentage of NDA filings is granted "priority review" by FDA? A friend of mine told me is 9%, this is quite different from "a lot". >>
I was simply pointing out that you shouldn't get your hopes up simply because a drug is granted priority review. Naturally, the stock touts will keep raising this issue to fuel speculation.
<<4. Why do you think "Novastan will be rejected"? The drug has been using in Japan for over 3 years without any negative report. Could you please give me some explanation on your conclusion? it's a huge thing.>>
Because TXB's clinical trails were faulty and results were not statistically significant.
You may want to study the inter-relationships between TXB, ZONA, and ARNX. There is striking similarity between the capitalization structures, business methods, and investors of all three companies - all of which have been very succesful in selling overpriced stock to the general public, but have yet to deliver anything. |
