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: Biomaven who wrote (7266)	10/29/2002 11:36:20 AM
From: Icebrg	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

A lot of unknowns at play here: Erik NEW YORK, Oct 29 (Reuters) - Shares of ImClone Systems Inc. (NasdaqNM:IMCL - News) fell as much as 14 percent on Tuesday after an electronic media report said the company's cancer drug may have failed a European trial. ImClone's German partner, Merck KGaA (Frankfurt:MRCG.F - News), which is conducting the trial, vigorously denied the report, which appeared on the Web site of TheStreet.com and cited an unnamed U.S. oncologist and an unnamed Wall Street fund manager who have been in contact with unnamed European doctors participating in the trial of Erbitux.

To: Biomaven who wrote (7266)	10/29/2002 12:08:02 PM
From: NeuroInvestment	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

Yes, I am puzzled that the press coverage,. and NASD report, seem to have focused primarily on the fraudulent claims made to the clinical trial site, as if they were the victim. In fact, the Sterling 'report' not only created a false report of adverse events, it also delivered false claims regarding indiplon's patent protection and the terms of the inlicensing agreement with DOV. It was too far off to have been accidental. The real victims were not at the clinical trial site, the true victims were the investing public, those who acted on the basis of false information. And in that context, the NASD action was far too weak. ( I did send these sentiments along to the WSJ reporter, FWIW). Harry Tracy NeuroInvestment

To: Biomaven who wrote (7266)	10/29/2002 8:31:39 PM
From: John Metcalf	Respond to of 52153

Normally, I am too emotional/radical, but this time it is usually reserved Peter ("It makes Sterling sound more aggressive than criminal") and Harry ("NASD sanctions are too weak"). Good goin! Here are your berets, bullhorns, and placards! Punishment proportionate to profits! Punishment proportionate to profits! Punishment proportionate to profits! To the barricades we go! This is exceptionally good company for a street-person like me.

To: Biomaven who wrote (7266)	10/31/2002 12:58:22 AM
From: Doc Bones	Respond to of 52153

Another story on Sterling, from NBIX's local paper, The San Diego Union-Tribune. Posted in: #reply-18170954 Original source: signonsandiego.com It makes the wrong-doing and inaccuracy much clearer than the WSJ did, apparently from information reported by NASD. The NASD action and that of Sterling (just suspending the Risks until greater pressure appeared) were not commensurate with the offence. EXCERPT: "Though Risk never received treatment at the clinic, he obtained information "from a questionable source with no personal knowledge of the events" about a patient who allegedly could not be roused after taking the experimental drug, according to NASD. Despite the confidentiality agreement, Doug Risk passed the information on to his brother, who on Feb. 20 issued a negative report on Neurocrine based in part on what later proved to be erroneous information about the drug's alleged side effects. David Risk's research report on Neurocrine also contained other material that was "inaccurate or misleading," and Risk did not try to verify the accuracy of the information, according to NASD." Doc