VLAD, I think you are way off base in blaming Leland for the decline in vivus stock price. Hindsight is 20/20, and no one could have predicted the media hype that Viagra was going to have. Furthermore,
1.) I have searched the executive information at edgar-online.com. Leland is not making $350,000; he has been working for free for the past 6-8 months. Vivus has Harvard MD scientists (Gusendheit/ Crist?) and highly competent executives that include Stanford MBA's. These guys aren't idiots like the picture that you paint.
2.) Secondly, and most importantly, you are not an officer in the company. Clearly, you are drawing inferences from less than 10% of the information that the executive officers have. In the last press release, Leland stated that the company had "made significant company developments." Do you have any clue to what these developments maybe? I don't, and of coarse you don't. This is confidential information that effects corporate strategy. And do you really believe that Leland should reveal this information to you and everyone else?...I'm not even going to answer that one.
3.) Vivus is not a Pfizer, their resources are limited. There strategies are limited. Pfizer presently has $500 million in lawsuits. With a market cap of $80 million, just one of those lawsuit could bankrupt this company.
4.) You should realize the immense pressure faced by Vivus Management. Essentially, they are going up against the 3000 lb guerilla called Pfizer. The marketing expenditures for Viagra are $100 million. This figure exceeds the market cap of Vivus.
5.) As far as the marketing partner goes. Do you really think that Leland is that incompetent? I am sure Lee Wilson understands more than anyone that Vivus is an R&D company, and not a marketing giant like Pfizer. Astra is most likely their best shot for a marketing partner. But, as you well know, they are in the middle of a merger with Zeneca. What is Leland supposed to do here? Tell Zeneca to call off the merger?
7.) Vivus management and everyone else on this board realize the risk of systemic phosphodiesterase inhibition. I think the best coarse of action for management is to wait and see how the safety issues surrounding viagra play out. If we do see a black box label, wouldn't it better to sign a partner after the blackbox? Obviously, in terms of shareholder value, yes. How much longer will that take?...hard to say, but it may be worth the wait.
Signing a marketing partner in shortsightedness will result in nothing more than a pop in stock price, and possible longrun decrease in shareholder value.
8.) The easiest thing to do in the world is to look back with 20/20 hindsight and realize what could have been done. The second easiest thing to do is to criticize those at fault. I am sure that Leland is too busy to read this thread, but if he does, I am sure the best thing that you could do for him and this company is think a little more positively about the future.
9.) Finally, This stock is speculative. It is for the intelligent investor like you and I who understand the relative ratio of risk to reward. Right now, I think there is relatively little risk with incredible potential for reward (if management plays its cards correctly). And I believe we will see a substantial increase in shareholder value when they do sign the partner, when the time is right.
One other thing, you and everyone on this board is way ahead of the curve on understanding the advantages that Vivus has over Muse.
Most doctors still do not understand...hey, on second thought where is that marketing partner! |
