SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (2344)12/18/2000 11:12:10 PM
From: Pseudo Biologist  Respond to of 52153
 
Maybe PB would like to comment?

Sure, just to say that Peter has covered everything I can think of -g-

Historically, Abgenix has always been focused on this technology, first as a sub of CEGE and later as an independent company. MEDX came into their technology via an acquisition of GenPharm some years after doing R&D work on other kind of "engineered" antibodies, including several clinical projects.

It has been much easier for the "street" to understand and value ABGX given their "laser sharp" focus on Abs derived from transgenic mice from the get-go. Not so for MEDX. In all fairness, I have to say that ABGX's management has also shown to be better in execution, not just PR.

PB



To: Biomaven who wrote (2344)12/19/2000 11:51:15 AM
From: tuck  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 52153
 
CNBC article on biotech mutual fund outlook. Interesting to see what a few of the managers are up to:

cnbc.com

Cheers, Tuck



To: Biomaven who wrote (2344)12/20/2000 2:02:50 PM
From: Londo  Respond to of 52153
 
Thanks for your explanation between ABGX/MEDX's technology.. (and for Pseudo biologist's reply..) Looking at the 10-K's, they certainly did sound the same.

Still, I'm rather puzzled at the huge valuation differences.