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 : Neotherapuetics possibly has a breakthrough drug - NEOT -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Marty who wrote (97)	4/24/2000 3:54:00 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 204

Marty, That's an extreme example, hoarding news. You see it around earnings most often, or a secondary. But you also see it around major announcements. We have a general idea of when, for example, the FDA might render a decision on a drug. If this is likely to happen when the stock has been depressed and during the time at which conversion terms may be reset, you can bet that's when the holders will renegotiate the terms. So cooperation from management isn't required. But often they are under pressure from shareholders after a long basing period, and are only too willing to pump things via news hoarding or whatever. Anyway, I can't say much more until I see the registration statements containing the relevant terms, which I haven't. My favorite recent example of this scheme is with CYPB early this year. After conversion, and before earnings, CYPB withheld news of an asset sale that they would normally announce. It was spotted in the SEC archives a week before earnings. It was not announced until the day of earnings. If you're curious, the story can be found on that thread and this one: Subject 24615 And with that I quit the subject for now. Not sure which small molecule company you're referring to. GLFD? Ebewe's Cerebrolysin? Can you get me a post or other reference? Regarding patents, law is still being made in the biotech IPR area. As I understand it, one can patent a mechanism of action or pathway pretty reliably if it is well described and no prior art on that specific mechanism or pathway. But receptors have many pathways, so several companies could target the same recpteor for the same purpose without infringing on each other. Beyond that, things get hazier; see AMGN current dispute. Not that my understanding of patent law is anything but superficial. Anyhow, NEOT is still as much in the race as anyone, per my humble DD. I don't have a position, and am still watching. Thinking larger cap names at the moment. Cheers, Tuck