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 : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (2435)	1/2/2001 10:00:33 AM
From: Londo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

re: cash-rich vs. cash-poor biotechs and potential I think there's been some slight miscommunication on my part with regards to my previous statements.. I'll try to clarify by responding some of your statements. re: old, old SEC filings.. I did a a bit more research on this, and its possible to get the documents with a little hassle. sec.gov It's what some of us try to do, excepting the "thin air" part. As a professional investor, it's what I do. I guess what I was trying to express here was that given the information that already exists out there on biotechnology companies, pinpointing undiscovered 10-baggers before its already obvious that they are on their way there is still much an art rather than a science... "thin air" was a bad phrase to use, "deep screening" would be appropriate. Also, I'm not a professional investor, nor will I ever claim to be. Why do you exclude the (a given) company that has hot sht, but wants to finish a level of testing on a shoestring such that they won't need to give away the farm?* It was a theoretical situation where if two companies had a technology that warranted a market cap of x, and if cash translated into an addition of market cap of those cash levels, it would be preferrable to invest in the company that possessed the least amount of cash, assuming that the technologies could produce equal and positive cash flow.. In reality of course it would be nicer if the company had cash on hand to market and do the other stuff with.. I was completely agreeing with your statement about cash-poor biotechs containing much more leverage. You can't pick them? No problem! But please quit throwing dogmatic crap in the face of those that can (and have). I never made such a statement, Richard. Why would I be here if that's what I truly believed? Arguing on a stock message board that all people can't pick stocks is a waste of time, and a huge appeal to perfect market theory. Pick the Idecs of the world and avoid the Tregas. My Trega statement was rather weak, but I was just trying to illustrate my point that its one possibility that a Trega does happen when a biotech company is low on cash.. heck, even CEGE agreed to get bought out for roughly 9-10 bucks a piece until ABGX alleviated their cash situation. GVAX? GM-CSF was probably the correct selection. GVAX secretes GM-CSF. What is the exact nature of "antigen" that will be recognized by patients who receive GVAX?? As far as I know, depends on the indication.. e.g. for prostate, the measure was prostate specific antigen.