Rainier:
They're the merged entity of ARRS and SQNA. Know them very well. ARRS was a structure-based drug design company (sort of like Agouron, but with different tricks). SQNA was a "positional genomics" effort. Both companies were respected, although SQNA had been through a bit of internal turmoil, and ARRS had been slow to describe a secret weapon, "delta".
Great science. There's a guy named Mike Venuti who I have particular faith in. You're correct.... the chart looks lousy. People believe that the merger resulted, in part, from the CEO's "Millennium Complex" (that is, he envies the market capitalization of competitor MLNM), and that it was not necessarily a good thing.
As a result of the CEO's problems with grandiosity, the company is having trouble consolidating around a given task. For example, they just formed an agrichemical subsidiary.
Great company, great science, a CEO that has yet to deliver. So, why not just buy MLNM?? There are at least two answers.... first, the market capitalization may have become extremely discounted relative to patents plus what it takes to build an integrated discovery group. That argument hasn't washed in the market for some time. Second.... the company is the unquestioned leader in structure determination for certain proteases, particularly for those involved in asthma.
Neither argument washes for me, and I prefer the relatively sane-looking world of MLNM. I once owned SQNA, before some internal strife hit. I never owned ARRS, which is sort of amazing.
I'll see if I can get some more knowledgeable biofreaks to comment. I know that John and Miljenko follow the company, and a contributor to several threads, John Dwyer, also follows it.
My opinion? I'll be interested when I see that the CEO can integrate a genomics effort with drug discovery.
Cheers! Rick |
