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: rkrw who wrote (8230)	5/2/2003 12:14:46 AM
From: Miljenko Zuanic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

Obviously, I do not agree with you guys. To make it clear, I do not talk here about NBIX and what they have accomplished. They have done excellent job with Indiplon and are working hard on many other projects, with cash control. The problem is model how to do business in bio, and rise chance for success. First, there is very thin line between success and failure. To make it even more clear, AGPH, CELG, CEPH, …(and NBIX) did not have BLOODY IDEA at start what will candidate generate at end. They licensed candidates, continue with development, and finished. Great! Now, why you guys do not make list of the licensed candidates when this happy ending did not work? The main risk in development cycle is rushing trough preclinical development and moving candidate to humans based on false signals. This is where bios are vulnerable and failed more often. Does licensed candidate have higher probability and better risk profile. NO! Actually, if licensed candidate is from early stage it is more often with higher risk than candidate from its own pipeline. So, “Does it matter? “ Yes, it does. To me. Second, if Indiplon did not work as it did, where will NBIX be today? BTW, I will prefer that NBIX munch two small neuro bios from SD area than dopamine 2 candidate for ED. Miljenko