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: tuck who wrote (4443)	8/10/2001 1:21:39 PM
From: Ian@SI	Respond to of 52153

Tuck, With both CRGN and MLNM retaining significant ownership in any drugs developed with their alliance partners, the potential is that one or both of them could join the ranks of the major Pharmas about 10-20 years out. In the relatively short term (less than 5 years), the stock price is subject to the market's whim. I'm beginning to conclude that these companies may form better trading vehicles than buy and hold investments. Ian

To: tuck who wrote (4443)	8/10/2001 2:29:05 PM
From: Biomaven	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

tuck, I'm concerned about the Bayer deals. These are basically early-stage deals, which historically have not fared that well in mergers. (In contrast, late stage product that get disgorged because of mergers can often produce a windfall, like OSIP). If Bayer gets munched, then the surviving company will have to honor the letter of the deals. But who knows if they will pursue early stage leads diligently, which is where true rewards for partners lie. OTOH, I suppose MLNM could regain some rights to targets handed over to Bayer, which might be good in the long term. I've been concerned that Bayer seemed to be target crazy. (They also have a big deal with Lion to find novel gene targets.) Not clear to me they have the expertise or resources to really chase that many targets. Peter