SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/14/2000 5:09:00 PM
From: space cadet  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
very nice post, paradigm7241. It's clear you know a hell of a lot about biotechs which I like a lot of technology investors am just now starting to look into. My background is in electrical engineering so I am starting from scratch in this field. A few questions for you or anyone else on this thread who's knowledgeable. I recently bought symba and avxt and they've pretty much held their ground ok. Any opinions on them. I would like now to get into some of these recently discounted hi-flyers. Which looks most tempting here at these prices? Is there a way to buy CAT here in the US? It sounds great from everything I have heard. Where can you get quotes on it and what is its symbol. Another stock that you didn't mention but that I have heard is great is lynx. Supposedly they have some very exciting proprietary technology but they have dropped 50% from their highs. Do you have any opinion on them? Any other great undiscovered companies out there? Any cheapies? I hear a lot of people like vrgn. I especially like buying cheap stocks before they have gotten "famous" and holding on for the ride. Thanks for any comments you may have and any websites or references you may point me to.



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/14/2000 7:17:00 PM
From: jayhawk969  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
Current lead article in WSJ web version, likely tomorrows lead article:

Stock Prices Slump
As Biotech Shares
Lead Market Down

By AARON ELSTEIN
INTERACTIVE JOURNAL

Biotechnology stocks
tumbled Tuesday, pushing the
broader market lower, after the
U.S. and Britain agreed to
openly share data from a
project to map human genes.
Bonds rose and the dollar
weakened.
The decline in the biotech
sector sent the Nasdaq
Composite Index down 200.61
points, or 4.1%, to 4706.63. It
was the index's second-worst
point-drop on record. The
index already was struggling to
overcome a 141.38 drop
Monday amid concerns about
the high value of technology
stocks.
The Dow Jones Industrial
Average, meanwhile, fell
135.89 points to 9811.24. The
Standard & Poor's 500-stock
index dropped 24.47 to
1359.15, and the New York
Stock Exchange Composite
Index fell 6.18 to 588.43.
Investors rapidly unloaded
shares in biotechnology stocks
after President Clinton and
British Prime Minister Tony
Blair announced plans for the
sharing of gene decoding
information by government
laboratories and urged private
companies to do the same.
Mr. Clinton said discoveries
in deciphering the human
genetic code "should be made
freely available to scientists
everywhere." Biotech stocks
have rallied lately, in part on
the hopes that companies will
be able to make big profits
from drugs that are made from
their gene discoveries. The
Nasdaq Biotechnology Index
fell 12.6%.
Stocks were further
weakened by concerns about
valuations ignited Monday by a
tumble in European and Asian
markets and signs of
economic weakness in Japan.
The Nasdaq composite
suffered its fourth-worst point
drop Monday. The index had
closed at a new record just
Friday, a day after piercing
5000 for the first time. Analysts
say it may be in for a rough
period after rising at a
disproportionate pace to the
Dow industrials.
The Dow industrials have
been mired in a correction --
defined by Wall Street as a
drop of at least 10% from its
high -- as investors shun
old-economy blue chips. But
their thirst for new-economy
technology stocks had
continued to drive the Nasdaq
Composite the new heights
until worries surfaced Monday.

Encouraged by stability in
Asian markets overnight,
some U.S. investors crept
back into the technology
sector early Tuesday looking
to snap up depressed stocks.
But the rally fizzled as
investors started to focus on
Tuesday's economic data,
which underscored concerns
that growth still remains too
strong to keep the Federal
Reserve from raising interest
rates.
The Fed has raised rates
four times in less than a year
to prevent the robust economy
from aggravating inflation, but
there are still no concrete
indications that economic
growth is cooling to a
sustainable pace. Policy
makers meet again next
Tuesday and are widely
expected to boost rates.
In the latest evidence of
economic strength, the
Commerce Department
reported Tuesday that retail
sales rose 1.1% in February to
a seasonally adjusted $265.69
billion. While in line with
expectations, the number still
suggested that consumers,
who account for two-thirds of
the nation's economic activity,
are continuing to spend
heavily.
While strong economic
growth is good for corporate
profits, investors have been
more focused recently on the
ramifications of higher interest
rates. Higher borrowing costs
could eventually hurt corporate
bottom lines because it will
restrain consumer spending.
Higher rates also could be
especially cruel to technology
companies, which depend on
cheap money to fuel their
growth engines. Investors have
bid up the stocks of many of
these companies to lofty levels
expecting the companies to
keep growing aggressively.
The Fed has signaled that it
will raise rates as much as
necessary to slow the
economic expansion before it
produces inflationary
pressures. Investors -- and
Fed policy makers -- will be
closely watching reports on
producer and consumer prices
this week to see whether
inflation is rising.
Despite Tuesday's data,
which ordinarily would be bad
news for bond investors, the
benchmark 30-year bond rose
in price, pushing down it yield
to 6.09%. Joe Lavorgna, an
economist at Deutsche Bank
Securities, attributed the rise
to the U.S. Treasury buying
back debt. "They've gone
deeper into the curve than they
have before" in previous
repurchases, he said.



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/14/2000 8:56:00 PM
From: A.J. Mullen  Respond to of 52153
 
I agreed with your other respondents, great post. I'm not sure, though, that I'd bracket MYGN with Incy and CRA.

It's interesting how the market has reacted. I would place Hgsi, incy, and CRA in descending order of intellectual, but CRA is down the least (18.5%) and INCY is down 27.2% while HGSi is 19.1%. MYGN who have clearly shown function, getting tests to market, is hardly down at all. Perhaps that makes sense in the context of the other three, but not compared to all other the biotechs that are guilty by association. Relative valuations are clearly out of wack, but we are (I am) still left without an
idea concerning absolute value.

Bill and Tony may have done what Alan couldn't: administered a short, sharp, shock. The rest of the week will be interesting.



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/14/2000 9:41:00 PM
From: jbe  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 

Clinton-Blair actually came out in SUPPORT of gene patents (or rather, of patents of gene-based inventions), according to Motley Fool. What do you think of their take on the subject?

==================

Today's Real News: Government Supports Gene Patents
How investors are misunderstanding biotech
By Jeff Fischer (TMF Jeff)
March 14, 2000

People fell all over themselves to sell biotech shares today, even though many of these same people had rushed to buy the shares only recently. Human Genome Sciences (Nasdaq: HGSI) , Celera (NYSE: CRA) , Millennium Pharmaceuticals (Nasdaq: MLNM) , Incyte (Nasdaq: INCY) and many other young, leading biotech stocks fell 20% or greater. The culprit?

The media is pointing to Bill Clinton and the U.K.'s Tony Blair. The two men had the "audacity" to propose that raw human genome sequencing information should be shared with the public. That is not new information, however. The Human Genome Project was created long ago to do this very thing (share its information), and since its inception Celera stated that it would likely share its raw data for free or at very little cost to subscribers. So, in fact, the only novel news presented today was good news, thus it is baffling that biotech shares got stomped.

This evening I spoke with Human Genome Science's President and CEO, Dr. William Haseltine, and he happily pointed out that today was the first time in history that the government publicly stated that it supports gene-related patents. Dr. Haseltine said, "Read the quote from Clinton," and then he read it aloud. Today Clinton said, "Intellectual property protection [i.e., patents] for gene-based inventions will... play an important role in stimulating the development of important new health care projects.' Dr. Haseltine said that if he wanted to, he could begin his next annual report with this monumental statement, and quote today as a monumental day.

Investors apparently misunderstood the meaning and implications behind Clinton's statements, however, sending almost all biotech stocks sharply lower. How could Wall Street misunderstand so badly? Perhaps because today the government also stated that scientists cannot get patents for human genes themselves. This, however, should not be a surprise to the industry or to investors, either. Any biotech company with patent attorneys worth their salt would not attempt to randomly patent human genes.

As Dr. Haseltine has said in the past, "Trying to patent a human gene is like trying to patent a tree. You can patent a table that you build from a tree, but you cannot patent the tree itself." With genes, you can patent specific uses that you discover regarding a gene, but you cannot patent the gene itself. (After all, you didn't create the gene. Just like you didn't create the tree.)

Human Genome Sciences has been issued 117 patents on specific uses for genes in the body. These are the kinds of patents that have value and that should, almost without a doubt following today, stand up in a court of law. Dr. Haseltine said, "Raw genomic data is not patentable because it is not useful [or original]." His company, instead, has focused on isolating genes and turning them into forms that can be used to make a protein for the body. This practice is original and patentable.

So, today the business of patenting information regarding the use of isolated genes was blessed by two key leaders of the Free World. Biotech companies such as Human Genome Sciences and Millennium Pharmaceuticals, both of which have been obtaining patents on this very premise for several years, have been vindicated, as has the entire gene-based drug industry of the future.

Celera and Raw Genome Data
"Part two" of today's news was that, according to Clinton and Blair, all raw human genome data should be shared with the public.

From the start, Celera has planned to make much of this information widely available without cost or at very little cost. This month, Celera will publish the fruit fly genome free of charge. In the future, Celera will share sequencing data from the human genome as well. As today's detailed press release from Celera reminds, this has always been the plan.

Celera is interested in sharing information with the world, not locking it away. Will all of Celera's information be freely shared? Well, most likely much of its "raw data" will be shared openly, and this raw data is what the government was naively clamoring for today -- "naively" because the value of the raw data (the genome itself) is limited anyway. When Celera adds additional expertise to its genomic information, however, it will almost certainly patent (when possible) and sell that value to subscribers. It is, after all, a business.

Understand, though, that having the human genome sequenced alone will not answer many questions or create much value by itself. This is only the beginning of the work. Isolating and discovering what each gene does in the body is where actual medical solutions can be discovered. Companies that discover these solutions deserve rewards for their labor and expense, and they will be rewarded -- as the government stated today (although the message was lost in the noise). Admittedly, most of the potential reward for young information gathering companies lies far down the road, but that has always been the case. Celera is in "phase one" of its business plan. (Biotech companies that have patented uses for isolated genes for years are considerably further along.)

So, the real culprit behind the tumble in biotech shares today was not Clinton or Blair, but investors who do not understand the business models that many young biotech companies are trying to create, and it was investors who may not understand how the patent process works and is enforced, either. These are complex topics and admittedly a great deal of uncertainty exists. However, companies such as Human Genome Sciences, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, and others that have filed patents for specific uses of isolated genes received excellent news from the government today, while genome sequencing companies, such as Celera, were merely reminded that leveraging raw genome data into dollars will meet much resistance. However, the real value has always been buried far beneath the raw genome data, and don't think that Celera didn't already know that.

fool.com



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/15/2000 12:09:00 AM
From: poodle  Respond to of 52153
 
Good points. Just to emphasize one:

If there will be no "gene" patents, it is hard to see how "genomic" companies can make any money. If they are day or month or even year ahead of the public databases no one is going to pay them much. (Unless it is fashionable.)

For patents it is important to be first. For genomic database it is not so crucial.



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/15/2000 4:00:00 PM
From: smolejv@gmx.net  Respond to of 52153
 
I see the call for freely available (human and otherwise) genomic information as an integral part of GNU effort: free (to be read as a verb) software! The fact that human genome was written by God and Windows API by skunks, locked up in dungeons of Redmond, does not make any difference to me - on the second thought yes, it's a question of qaulity of course -. We're talking creation and its fruits.

dj



To: paradigm7241 who wrote (796)3/15/2000 8:39:00 PM
From: JGoren  Respond to of 52153
 
good post paradigm. Clinton's desire to be "loved" just destroyed the only thing this country has--IPR. And, in doing so, he has played into the continuing European efforts to block or steal US biotech and agrotech. It will, of course, never happen, but Clinton doesn't care about the stock market a la he and Hillary's previous assault on healthcare companies, which put Amgen, for example, in a major down and stagnant condition for the first two years or so of his administration.