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 : Genta, Inc. (GNTA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 613 who wrote (1812)	5/11/2004 9:30:49 AM
From: Art Bechhoefer	Respond to of 1870

These nuissance lawsuits used to be more expensive to defend than they are now, on account of the safe harbor provision in recent legislation. Typically what happens is that the company will make a motion to dismiss, and if the motion is denied, the company then begins a very long and drawn out discovery process. Thus, the legal costs, except for the initial motion to dismiss, are spread out over a long period. The company, nevertheless, will have to make a provision in its financial statement to cover the legal costs, and that in turn will make the losses from quarter to quarter even higher than they are now. In reviewing the public announcements made by Genta, what is clear is that Genasense is a substance based on good theory for treating cancers where the Bcl-1 factor is present. The failure of the data to support a positive recommendation of the advisory committee is, in my view, a rather tenuous basis for instituting a lawsuit. If at some later time the data, supplemented by additional results, leads to approval, the lawsuits will evaporate. On the basis of information provided to shareholders and the public, there is no reason to believe that Genasense is not an effective treatment. If it turns out that Genta management knew the compound was deficient and tried to cover up that fact, then there might be a basis for a lawsuit. But if that were true, does anyone think that Aventis would have continued to support the research and testing? Art