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: keokalani'nui who wrote (587)	5/2/2001 3:14:27 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1784

Wilder, Listened to the MCLS conference call. I'm confused on a couple of points regarding objectives and cash burn, so I'll probably have to listen again and maybe call IR myself. I will update in detail when that's resolved. For now, per a previous post, bottom line is that . . . >>Naturally, they have to execute and score a win or two in the next year, and if they didn't it might be time to bail.<< They report that they are in "substantive talks." Mostly in structural proteomics (but also in biocatalysis) & chiefly with existing customers, but with a difference. Especially with respect to proteomics, they are being checked out by higher level pharma managers than usual. SVPs. FWIW. They've beefed up and if they don't get results from that, they will need to dilute. However, they are trading for roughly the replacement cost of the new facility (across the street from Argonne, BTW) and cash. They might do an acquisition in ADME-tox. They note several emerging companies with good cash flow, such that financing the munch with a stock swap would be accretive. They mentioned advantages in crystallizing GPCR-related and membrane bound proteins? Does that give you a hint on the other 39? Since they are in talks about this stuff, your email might go unanswered. Not a long Q&A, but analysts from well known companies on the call, so it seems as though interest is building. Per my threat, Trickle will munch another 1000 (it happens to be 1.75 again), and give them two Qs to come up with a strategic deal. Trickle notes EBIO is up hard on no news. We'll take it. Mass spec companies have resisted the CapEx slowdown better than most expected, resulting in a nice recovery for WAT. Trickle will sell 100 shares for four reasons. 1) Trickle feels we're in for a near-term pullback, if not a retest of March 22 lows. 2) WAT's improved fundamental outlook should be largely repriced in by now. 3) Trickle wants dry powder for the expected pull-back, and 1/2 of WAT holding is a good source. 4) Trickle has plenty of mass spec exposure. 100 shares at $56. Cheers, Tuck

To: keokalani'nui who wrote (587)	12/3/2001 11:58:29 AM
From: tuck	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1784

Wilder, Re: MCLS. Having another watch here because of Emerald BioStructures. It is taking almost two months, but I've made a little connection. The October 8th collaboration with Pharmacia has special signifigance, for Emerald is doing a lot of work on human topoisomerase I, as you know. It turns out that Pharmacia's irinotecan uses this target. Emerald collaborators at U. of Washington (where co-founder Stewart came from) have been fiddling with the linker domain to modulate the DNA snipping action. The COOH terminal is the only other domain not highly conserved, and this is where the tyrosine kinase (if memory serves) action occurs. I would expect that Emerald is fiddling with these domains in situations where it is bonded to irinotecan or similar compounds. I don't yet understand what tweak might favorably alter toxicity, but then, that's what MCLS is getting paid the small bucks for. Anyhow, the October 8th PR does not make this connection. I searched for abstracts from MCLS scientist's but they're being secretive. Champoux, Ireton, & others continue to publish work that likely parallels Emerald's topoisomerase I projects. Here's a full article on that compound by some of these guys from Science, free registration required. sciencemag.org Thinking this could lead to a deal similar to AMEV's for modifying MEDI's Synagis. Am I dreaming? Royalties were mentioned in the PR. I suppose I could go look and see if someone forgot to elide the numbers in the 8-K or where ever they might be. Even with this year's troubles, if MCLS gets below a buck again, Trickle & I might try for another ride. Cheers, Tuck