Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Guilford (GLFD) - Steadily Rising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve who wrote (328)	7/16/1999 12:28:00 PM
From: tuck	Respond to of 496

Steve, I would guess that they're getting their clients in. Then they'll raise their target, maybe upgrade, so their clients can then sell after the resulting run. If I was long here, I'd wait for that kind of news and sell soon afterwards. Cheers, Tuck

To: Steve who wrote (328)	7/28/1999 3:29:00 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 496

steve & Thread, NI wrote a while back: "but there are a number of inaccuracies in your post. 1) Other small molecule neurotrophin programs are being run by Cephalon (about to enter Ph1), Vertex (in Ph1), Myelos (preclinical), and NeoTherapeutics--who finished one small Ph2 but won't finish their larger (400pt) one until the end of 99. I probably have omitted one, but I have heard nothing of a US Big Pharma or 'Austrian' competitor--the Regeneron/Glaxo collaboration has not made much progress." There is indeed one inaccuracy in that post, which I have admitted: there are more competitors with addiction programs than I thought. I responded to N.I. with regard to the competitors with neurotrophic compounds that appeared to be ahead of GLFD, in terms of bringing a product to market. They include an Austrian company and two big pharmas. N.I.'s response? SILENCE. It is too bad, because N.I. is clearly more qualified than most of us to make some judgement as to the competitive landscape in neurotrophins that I've presented, but apparently he isn't interested in sharing such thoughts -- if he has formed any -- with us ignorant peons. Maybe he did his DD and sold the info to his subscribers. Maybe his head is in the sand. Who knows until he says something or we find it in one of his newsletters? I am disappointed in his unresponsiveness, whatever the reason. With his contacts, he might be able to find out if Cerebrolysin (the Austrian company's product, apparently available at least in some places), for example, is making any headway in the marketplace. Do any of you guys have opinions on this stuff? Here's a couple of links that contain links I used to find this stuff. I'm curious to hear an opinion on it, even if it doesn't come from a biotech newsletter editor. Message 10261307 Message 10261991 Cheers, Tuck PS to Marty van Acker: congratulations on a good call, dude! You still in this thing?