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

To: Biomaven who wrote (998)	4/20/2000 1:30:00 AM
From: Vector1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

Peter, I don't know if SEPR will make $4.00 per share in 03 but if they do the multiple will be more like 60-80x. The question is what discount rate do you use to get to todays value. V1

To: Biomaven who wrote (998)	4/20/2000 10:10:00 AM
From: biowa	Respond to of 52153

Peter, three-year price targets for many of our companies While it may or may not make sense, it pushes the edge on hyping in my opinion, because everyone hears "price target" and assumes one year. Also, when you only do it for some of your companies, that only magnifies the effect. Sepracor earnings from a drug three or four years out are actually more predictable than for typical biotech drugs one year away from approval. Not sure I can completely agree, there's a reason they have to go through clinical trials and aren't just ANDA approvals. Hence the standard metric of discounting a drug at 40% a year for three years "because it's just in Phase I" doesn't make sense here. First, a decent analyst will probably give SEPR ICEs a quicker acceptance curve and potentially larger market share than a NCE. Thus the non-NCE is partly accounted for. Second, if the analyst does feel that the ICE strategy makes approval less risky, they shouldn't be using 40% (BTW, I might use 45% for no human results released at all), 30-35% might be more appropriate. Don't disagree with the potential SEPR, just splitting hairs on the price target issue in general. Afterall, wouldn't want to disturb the Groupthink <g>. biowa