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 : Sepracor-Looks very promising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BMcV who wrote (4595)	10/20/2000 2:29:22 AM
From: BMcV	Respond to of 10280

You really have to give the market credit for prescience. The reaction to the initial news that the Prozac patent would not be extended brought SEPR immediately to the point where the stock is now, around $90, as if it knew the drug would turn out to be worthless: finance.yahoo.com

To: BMcV who wrote (4595)	10/23/2000 1:37:47 AM
From: Doc Bones	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10280

I don't think too much can be read into the SEPR market swings. Here are a few one day moves of another big holding of mine, VRTX (Thx MZ, RH), in recent weeks: Sept 29 -9 Oct 3 -6.5 Oct 5 -5 Oct 6 -6 Oct 9 +7 Oct 12 -7.5 Oct 16 +4 Oct 17 +5 After all this it wound up about where it started, around 80, on no earth-shaking news. These are uncertain times and stocks are swinging to and fro. When I was first led to the milk-and-honey land of SEPR by Saint Peter, it was possible to profit from rather cheap calls. Not any longer: these stocks are known to be volatile, with options priced to match. I have a good unhealthy dose of paranoia myself, and I believe considerable market manipulation does take place. But I think it is much more the work of market insiders than company insiders. Also mutual funds are a bigger factor in the sector, leading to bigger trading swings. I don't understand the market's prescience theory: If the market somehow knew that the drug would be worthless, and so priced the stock at $90, why would the stock have climbed back to $120 in the meantime? Doc