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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Biomaven who wrote (10710)	7/9/1999 9:17:00 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Peter, I admire your post. Your command of the language is impressive. I have often over the years read your post and wished I could have posted with the same eloquence. But, from what your are saying I just have a hard time believing you have read the Endotoxin paper or the commentary contained in the web version of the annual meeting slide show. I would pay attention to your analysis of Castellos comments on XOMA's sepsis strategy because I respect the way you think. The choice of Meningococcemia as a trial was brilliant. Rather than being too hard one could actually say Neuprex could be demonstrated to work for this indication but fail to prove that it can be of benefit for hard core sepsis. XOMA'S whole strategy is not to attack the core problem of sepsis. I can't do justice to what XOMA has already laid out. But aside from the selling of floorless convertibles I am very satisfied with the pragmatic decision making at XOMA and the way they spell out what they are doing. Can't think of another company that does this. As to your key idea about Wall Street, having done billions of dollars business with dozens of firms I just don't see them as that inflexible. When things change, they change.

To: Biomaven who wrote (10710)	7/9/1999 10:10:00 PM
From: Bluegreen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

Peter, I too have admired your posts. Would you mind spending some time looking at the slide presentations on Xoma's website and letting us know your thoughts?

To: Biomaven who wrote (10710)	7/10/1999 12:28:00 AM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

From Australia this view of the biotech industry here and there. Some of the people quoted have already have their words published in the U.S. afr.com.au

To: Biomaven who wrote (10710)	7/10/1999 3:12:00 PM
From: Robert K.	Respond to of 17367

Peter. Welcome. PB. Welcome back. I must agree that you really cant get a grasp on what bpi is about until you read the endotoxin paper at xoma.com. Its biased, so keep that in mind. BUUUT, the references are all there. Standard K disclaimers. btw-lets here what you think after you read em.

To: Biomaven who wrote (10710)	7/11/1999 1:17:00 AM
From: Pseudo Biologist	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 17367

Peter, great post. I agree almost 100% with your first paragraph. I personally see Xoma shares as representing little more than call options on the success of Neuprex. Everything else -- anti-CD20, human engineering, hu1124, Mycoprex, etc. -- may affect the expiration date of these hypothetical options. In other words, those other programs may generate or have generated cash that allows the Neuprex game to continue. And, bottom line, yes, a failure in the Meningo trial would come very very close to make the options expire for good. The only qualifier depends on the answer to your question on funds to complete the trauma trial. I think they do have the funds to do it, and we may have I-prex to thank for that. However, from what I have read () and understand, it is hard to see Neuprex working for anything sepsis-like if* it were to fail in Meningo. As for your second paragraph, I am not so sure Xoma could have played it any better with BPI (E5 and sordid stories before that are another matter). And George's suggestion to take a quick look at Castello's slides is a good and relatively painless one to understand their strategy and perhaps accept its wisdom. Here is the direct link to the presentation: xoma.com Of course, the really macho suggestion is to read the 35-page long KPMG report AND the 140-plus references. -g- Most of the Xoma regulars are said to have done just that. PB (*) reading includes a glance at the KPMG report but does NOT include covering any significant portion of the 140 or so references.