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 : Imclone systems (IMCL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cacaito who wrote (2022)	2/14/2002 1:51:09 PM
From: Cacaito	Respond to of 2515

MerckKA paid $60M for their 3% stake in Imcl, this is roughly 2 million shares, sold in the market at $60 per share equals $120 million after holding if for 3 years a nice 33% per year. No wonder they are not taking legal action yet, the drug is already free and profitable to MerckKA, the shareholders paid for it. Caveat: I am assuming that MerckKA obtained their 3% stake for the $60M.

To: Cacaito who wrote (2022)	2/14/2002 4:21:25 PM
From: IRWIN JAMES FRANKEL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2515

"Case is building up" What case? Not BMY. Failure to inform Merck of the FDA RTF (in advance of what?) is meaningless to any claim that BMY might assert. Merck, how is it damaged? IMCL disclosed the news to everyone promptly. Do you suggest that material inside information, (the FDA RTF) even if required by a contract, should be disclosed to Merck prior to other shareholders? I don't see that. BMY's only fruitful approach is to work with IMCL to get Erbitux approved. That will build value. Infighting and lawsuits ONLY make money for the lawyers. But that's OK - lawyers are wonderful people. (At least that is what people think when they need us.) <g> ij