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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Nuvo Research Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Montana Wildhack who wrote (11217)	10/18/2002 2:27:39 PM
From: Montana Wildhack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14101

No. No. Right out of the box Each investor has to decide whether they really have finished the submission. The IR department has flatly said that they have. I'll waste no time on discussing an approval at this stage since it is the axiom that should be defining an investment in DMX. If you have no experience in bio's then I will offer that $20-30 million (all amounts will be in US funds) is a reasonable estimate of the total upfront with no less than half due on approval in a case such as Pennsaid/Dimethaid. Last sentence of principle: The overriding dominance of the US market issues rightly tops the hierarchy of how important specific issues are to the success or failure of your investment here. A quick and rough present hiearchy as example: Ist level: success in the US market; ongoing cash 2nd level: solidity of the OXO aquisition 3rd level: success in other markets 4th level: advantages/disadvantages of other decisions 5th level: shareprice prior to 1 and 2 being resolved You certainly don't have to agree with mine. It would be good though to have a framework you believe in to see the events through. ..... How important is it to you what the shareprice was before you read the announcement that: Dimethaid receives FDA approval or Dimethaid receives FDA rejection? Stop reading. Answer the question. Its possible that those who say "not at all" won't be watching the price on a daily basis - but I wouldn't bank on it. (Wolf's constant diatribe about the mind versus the animal. This may be overdone. I'm sure the stress we feel doesn't affect our thinking) Second question. What factors are you taking into account when you're assessing the pros and cons of placements versus signing with a partner earlier? Possible answers: They couldn't sign earlier(god help you if you're not short) Acqua versus PP's has killed the shareprice The difference in the dilution levels and EPS calculations The ability to attract more investors The higher shareprice throughout My answer: I acknowledge that partnering earlier would likely have materially reduced the dilution at this point and I'll call that 10%. I also see that DMX will be getting that same cash in the future and would need to know the difference between the deals offered earlier versus the final deal agreed to in order to begin assigning some values. My interest in assessing Acqua versus a first rich PP and then a second miserable PP is near zero which I assess as an appropriate level of materiality to this issue. Third question. How relevant is the OXO acquisiton in your investment and how do you measure that seperately but usefully integrated into the whole? My answer: WF10 is far more dilutive than any conceivable placements. It is a different enterprise which I will value only according to its dilutive effects on Pennsaid EPS as they occur pending information. (While I have a very high opinion of WF10 I see no possibility of earnings for some 2 years out. That's not to say that news from this area won't affect the price. It most seriously could. I think the phase III was done in such a way that with FDA experience, REK is painstakingly reaffirming the details so it can be used to draw solid conclusions. I also think Rebecca had reasons to think she would be issuing the first milestone shares at a much higher price (and lower dilution) when they're due this year. She will either be right on next years or we won't be here. Dr Kuhne knew this risk and for this year will do very well.) .... Why say all this? What does it prove? Its urgent to have a core framework that not only holds up under argument; but, can be addressed with quantifyable risk assessements. I don't know if Pennsaid will be approved. I believe that in its current situation the odds are very good. I didn't know earlier if Dimethaid could take Pennsaid through the approval process. I bet that they could. I don't know whether a major pharma will want to try and sell a topical NSAID into the US market. I believe they do. I don't know how successful it would be. I have to make the most reasonable estimates possible though. (In my opinion sweating over this is essential). I don't know what WF10 will do. I do have the estimates though now that I've arrived at this step in my framework and can incorporate the amounts owed into my sales estimates and come up with a dilution range estimate. (Why do this??? To see if it can poison the soup. Duh.) I don't know wether they will last throughout. I have to watch cash as a current process. I predicted and now note that the squeeze is here in the fall. The single most important fact absolutely is the ongoing entity (the ability to exist). end of part 2

To: Montana Wildhack who wrote (11217)	10/22/2002 11:06:40 AM
From: Joe Krupa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14101

Wolf, Please let me offer you a belated, but hearty, thanks for the great DMX trilogy. Succinct, insightful, provocative and highly logical. A must read for all DMX investors at this point who are not sure why they are still here. "In 16 recent days of trading over the last 20 or so the buyer using Peters has bought 504,000 shares of DMX. Peters during that time didn't sell a single share. This is after the buyer using Research Capital accumulated some 850,000 shares net over the past several months. I also agree with the detective that a third buyer working through Anonymous accumulated a smilar sized position although this is somewhat less easy to verify." That's now 580,700 for Peters as of this minute, and in the past 30 days. Their pace has increased since yesterday. You also correct that just under a million shares were accumulated by each of Research Capital and Anonymous. One other accumulator was Yorkton with near 400,000. All this in the past few months. While many of us scream about the timelines being troublesome, it seems not to bother those accumulating houses of late, especially Peters. Peters well paced buying as well as their acceleration in the last few days, speaks itself to the fact that they are not bothered by what we perceive to be worrisome delays. In fact their buying pattern would indicate that they not only are not bothered by the timelines, but rather have planned on them. In other words, if Peters thought FDA was coming a couple months ago, they would not have waited until September to start buying. A little more grist for the thought mill. Thanks again Wolf. joe