T/FIF Portfolio Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Biotech / Medical : T/FIF Portfolio

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: John Metcalf who wrote (633)	2/28/1999 5:59:00 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) of 1073

<Murphy's basic method is to add the amount of money a biotech has spent on research to its cash value. In theory, research produces value, but you can see the problem.>< Murphy doesn't calculate the _value_ of the research, nor the viability of the program, nor amount of competition in the target field.> To JBash also: You know, I bet you'd get a decent list of bio's to invest in, or at least a more informative "growth flow" number, if you used his approach and went back and simply subtracted the amount of "wasted research" out of his numbers... this would be defined as simply programs that have been discarded. I think (I've stated before) from the standpoint of an analyst he has simply bitten off more than he can chew. He should be taking his "growth flow" idea and refining and "tweaking" it IMO... and he can probably only do this by focusing on fewer areas. We would then of course discuss science in order to toss some of the companies out as JB pointed out. Anyone want to work on "growth flow" numbers for some of our companies over on the value thread? DAK

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next