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.

Pastimes : Home on the range where the buffalo roam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2883)	7/14/2000 11:26:59 AM
From: Walkingshadow	Respond to of 13572

Ray, My pleasure, sir: boards.fool.com forbes.com msnbc.com pirateinvestor.com time.com henson.austin.apple.com Nature and Science can be accessed and searched after free registration at nature.com sciencemag.org As you will see, J. C. Venter is not much of a curmudgeon......... but I trust you won't hold that against him! <ggg> Incidentally, re my previous comment from that post: << ....I wonder what the talk might be about in the boardrooms of Biogen, Monsanto, Merck, Dupont, Genentech, and so forth? Or, Stanford University, CalTech, MIT, Berkeley, Oxford University? Or the National Cancer Institute? Or the NIH itself? And what they might do? >> Well, yesterday Harvard University upped the ante in academia, becoming Celera's eighth subscriber: pecorporation.com Noting this, and mindful of the fiercely competitive nature of top academic institutions, I wonder how much longer other prominent academic institutions will tolerate operating at what they know to be a disadvantage to Harvard? Sure, any one of them could pony up $100 million, build a supercomputing center, hire a couple of hundred people to run it (albeit probably much less competently than Celera, who has no shortage of talent), build a sequencing facility and hire people to run that. And all that effort and money might even put them in roughly the same position that Celera was in, say, 6 months or a year ago. But that would take a long time, during which Celera would have certainly not been standing still, so they would then have to try to play catch-up, something the Human Genome Project with enormous talent and far greater funding was not able to do.......... Or they could just pay Celera $3 million to $5 million, and guarantee that they achieve that same goal, and that they continue to enjoy the fruits of whatever further advances Celera might make. Seems like a no brainer to me. Similarly, among the biotechs: Amgen and Immunex have signed with Celera. And, of the big pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Novartis, Pharmacia, and Takeda have signed. Since their very survival might be at stake, can other first-tier biotechs and big pharmaceutical companies really afford not to similarly form alliances with Celera? Regards, WS