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 : Trickle Portfolio -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (38)	11/1/2000 11:00:11 AM
From: tuck	Respond to of 1784

Peter & Rick, Everything about the chart makes IVGN look toppy here. siliconinvestor.com Don't think this will be an early buy for the Trickle Portfolio. Probably not QGEN, either. Other trickle companies "on the radar" look rich, too. ABSC is one I am quite familiar with -- disclaimer: Mom owns it on my reco, and I trade it (no position now) -- and I'd say it looks cheaper than those two. But I'd still wait for the 40s before nibbling at it. Cheers, Tuck

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (38)	11/1/2000 11:02:02 AM
From: Biomaven	Respond to of 1784

<IVGN> Shareholder equity is only $200M That's a little misleading if I'm reading this statement right. They show a roughly $1.8 billion liability on the books as "Cash and common stock payable to shareholders" but only $200 million is being paid as cash - I believe the balance will be (actually has already been) paid as IVGN stock. So if I'm right here, the shareholder equity next time should be bumped up considerably. This statement is really in "mid-transaction" and so is quite confusing. The bottom line is they should have over $300 million in cash when the dust settles, so they certainly have the resources to do whatever they reasonably want. I own them mostly because I bought LTEK waiting for a munch, and IVGN is what happened along. I did buy a little more though when they plunged after the street thought they overpaid for LTEK (they didn't). They're not exactly cheap, and as you say, integration of their large acquisition will definitely pose a challenge. Peter

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (38)	11/3/2000 11:34:46 AM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1784

Rick, You follow MDCC (Molecular Devices), right? I was attempting to slap a PEG ratio on them at Yahoo! But their quarterly/yearly estimates don't add up. biz.yahoo.com Note that the three quarters logged in this year add up to $.73/share. The 4th Q is estimated to be $.32/sh. Summed, one gets $1.05/share for FY00. But the yearly estimate given is $.82/sh. That's a $.23/sh discrepancy. If we use the $1.05/sh number, the company looks more attractive at these levels, with a PEG ratio in the 1.5 - 2 range, rather than 3, which is a little rich for me. Got a nibble target on this one? siliconinvestor.com Looks near-term oversold, & like it enjoys good support in this $60 - $70 range. How about Nigel's proposal of PCOP? Look at her go! No, Nigel, no pullback to bite on. Cheers, Tuck