To: Henry Niman who wrote (28983 ) 6/28/1999 8:02:00 AM From: Mudcat Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 32384
<your comment on the NDA filing of oral being filed as early as Sept 1998 seems to have no support, and the existence of a LGND document indicating a 3Q, '98 filing is a figment of your imagination, at best> OK Hank, just have to prove you wrong again as your creditability continues to slip! The following statements are from Ligands Annual Reports (is that an acceptable source to you or are they just another figment of my imagination?) Ligand 1996 Annual Report: issued around Apr 1997, top of page 9, "If these trials are successful, Ligand expects to file two NDA's for Targretin for CTCL in 1998, one for topical gel and one for the oral form." Ligand 1997 Annual Report: issued around April 1998, Letter to Shareholders, page 2, paragraph 2, "We expect to file an NDA for each of these drugs (meaning Targretin gel and Targretin Capsules) in the second half of 1998 or early 1999." So what nonsense are you going to use to try talk your way out of this one Hank? A short class in Project Management. A baseline schedule is developed to measure performance of a project. Based on the above Ligand statements, Ligand created a schedule baseline for filing the NDA's, when they did not meet the proposed schedule baseline and revised the schedule it is called a SLIP from the baseline. Slipping a schedule is not unusual, in fact almost every project I have seen has endured slips. Slips are a way of life in Project Management that is why many companies put slack in their official schedules to account for the unknowns that are bound to occur. I believe Ligand also included slack in their schedule and actually slipped more than the schedule shows. Your comments attacking me are just more of your nonsense. How could such an upopen minded person possibly be a professor at a university?