To: keokalani'nui who wrote (60 ) 6/22/2001 2:52:22 AM From: tuck Respond to of 897 Wilder, I concur with you about ISIP. Risk/reward mildly favors the long side, IMO. Not so sure about another old-time S.D. biotech, LGND. They may yet execute their slow developing business plan. But when I look at their regulatory success, it makes me wish they'd tried the big indications first. By the time they get apply for approval for these, better competition will be around or close, I fear. My Mom owns a pinch of both, and if I were to have her sell one of these stocks that seem to have been $12 for years, it would be LGND. Likely I'll hold it, just to see if this business plan works. It sure works in prolonging shareholder suffering. But enough rambling. IPIC has had quite a run on the legal news. Does the pipe and such justify this? Might dig a little. Overview of the pipe in this recent legal PR: >>LEXINGTON, Mass., May 30, 2001 (BW HealthWire) -- Interneuron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: IPIC chart, msgs) today announced that it has entered into an agreement with American Home Products Corporation (NYSE: AHP chart, msgs) that includes complete indemnification for certain classes of product liability cases filed against Interneuron related to Redux, a prescription anti-obesity compound withdrawn from the market in September 1997. This indemnification covers existing plaintiffs who have already opted out of AHP's national class action settlement and all claimants alleging primary pulmonary hypertension. The agreement also provides for AHP to fund additional insurance coverage to supplement Interneuron's existing product liability insurance. The Company believes this total insurance coverage is sufficient to address its potential remaining Redux product liability exposure. In addition, AHP has agreed to fund all future legal costs related to Interneuron's defense of Redux-related product liability cases. In exchange, Interneuron has agreed to withdraw its suit against AHP filed in January 2000, its objection to the judicial approval of a national class action settlement of Redux product liability claims, and its cross-claims against AHP related to Redux product liability legal actions. "This agreement is a significant milestone in Interneuron's ongoing resolution of Redux-related legal actions," said Glenn L. Cooper, M.D., president and chief executive officer of Interneuron. "It represents the best interests of our shareholders and employees, and we believe it will lead to a renewed focus on Interneuron's product pipeline of multiple advanced clinical stage product candidates. "No Redux-related judgments have been brought against Interneuron to date, and with this agreement, we are confident that we have put this chapter of product liability litigation behind us," noted Dr. Cooper. "Importantly, the indemnification from AHP includes plaintiffs who have opted out of AHP's proposed national class action settlement and all plaintiffs alleging primary pulmonary hypertension. The increased insurance coverage and funding of defense costs by AHP are structured to address the relatively small number of remaining cases. We believe the result is a strengthened ability to pursue our business model of licensing and timely product development and to re-direct our attention on the outcomes of ongoing clinical testing, which include several Phase III clinical trial milestones expected to take place this year and next." Interneuron's clinical stage products include: pagoclone, in Phase III clinical testing for panic disorder and in Phase II clinical testing for generalized anxiety disorder by Pfizer Inc., Interneuron's licensee; trospium, expected to begin Phase III clinical testing for overactive bladder in 2001; IP 501, in Phase III testing by the Department of Veterans Affairs for alcoholic cirrhosis and by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) for Hepatitis C cirrhosis; and PRO 2000, a topical microbicide that has completed Phase I/II clinical testing and is expected to enter Phase II/III clinical testing sponsored by the NIH in late 2001/early 2002. << snip This is an old company with old problems, so a long look back seems apropos on the chart:siliconinvestor.com And it looks like plenty of resistance to start IPIC forming a handle, at best, right here at 9 or so. From three years back! Boy I'll bet those folks are itchy now. The insiders having been scratching their itch with all ten nails:insidertrader.com Ask Rick about Lindsay Rosenwald. Carefully. Match sales to chart, and you'll see they have decent timing. Know nada about their burn rate, but my guess is they file a registration statement soon to take advantage of this. They have some largish late stage trials that ought to be burning someone's dough at a good clip.biz.yahoo.com So this looks like a nice short at these levels unless their "research premium" is worth it. This could be quick and easy money. Want to help? Cheers, Tuck