SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : GNTA
GNTA 1.430+2.1%Jan 13 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Chuca Marsh who wrote (31)11/9/1996 9:16:00 AM
From: Khris Vogel   of 68
 
Hi Chuck,
IMO, it' really hard to know if another biotech co. would have been interested in buying into GNTA based on the progress of the R&D pre-patent. It depends a lot on how hard GNTA is/was shopping for a merger partner or acquirer. Also, with all the biotechs out there working on so many cancer drungs from different angles, I would supposed that a patent is definitely something in GNTA's favor; it really depends if another co. is sufficiently impressed w/ GNTA's progress and agrees that the research in going on the right track. As it is, you can have four different scientists from four different co.'s in the same room working on a treatment for the same illness, and they can easily have no research in common and think the others are way off base. Short answer to your question is: who knows? The co. itself is going to be our best source of info (depending on them divulging info at a particular point in time).
My sense is a lot of co.'s would like to by the outcome of GNTA's research w/o taking on its debt. That can be tricky to do: I want all your assets but none of the liabilities. It can be done, but it doesn't leave much in hole afterwards, obviously.
As the co. splits, which half is going to be the one to prosper, the one w/ the cancer research or the one w/ the drug delivery technology? Once again, that's a hard one. Both show promise, and the fact that developments were ocurring in both areas is what attracted me to the co. in the first place. Unfortunately, in doing my research, I never picked up on anything about cash being so precarious. I guess I have mgmt. to thank for that in not sounding the alarm until after the fire had started.
I've not had the pleasure to have subscribed to the Cal. Tech. Stock Letter. Sorry.
I'm not surprised about the VC firm being closed mouth. Besides not wanting to get in trouble w/ investors, we still don't know how this deal's being swung (and may not know until the ink is dry) and if word was to get out that this is not good for shareholders, it could be ugly for them. So, my cynical guess is that they'd much rather keep us in the dark for a while. I'm glad that you made the effort, though, as we need to find out as much as possible so that we protect our investments here, don't you think?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext