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 : GLGC Gene Logic -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (192)	4/22/2005 4:00:11 PM
From: Mike McFarland	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360

The call was nearly all junk about slightly different margins here than there, yuck. Louis Tartaglia from mlnm runs the repositioning division, and those would have been great questions for him. I don't think I heard him speak at all. I figure that since mlnm was thinking about spinning off their "horizon technology" they gave something useful, and the glgc tissue bank and genomics database was part of why it ended up here. <what is the strategy to get something marketable out of them> I don't know how a drug could make it through big pharma and miss an indication. But then, major drugs are used off label--so, this is finding, say, off label uses for molecules that did make the cut for blockbuster status. There must be a huge junkyard of stuff that doesn't have blockbuster written on it. I hope glgc can at least make the program pay for itself, milestone payments. GLGC wont own the molecule--so maybe they can get a little something upfront. Not sexy, not ten bagger material here. I just want to see them break even for now and that will be tough enough. <tissue bank> The mlnm drug wasn't toxic, just did not work for that indication. I do not know how your target a potentially toxic drug to a new indication and somehow it isn't toxic anymore. Maybe chemotherapeutic drugs--since they are more or less toxic anyway? Great questions, wish you were on the CC! <cash drain> I assume this is why glgc trades for cash, sorta trending down with the burn rate--and tends to go lower before each quarterly burnings? Still, -4.1M net seems like a very modest burn for a microcap biotech. I seem to remember that the spreadsheet at Signals magazine showed that glgc had a survivor index of something like six years...although, if they spend a lot on this new service it might be a lot less. Ha, but then they've promised profitability in 2007, so maybe they will survive, period! Here is hoping. I would really like to see them get bought out. That certainly would freshen up the story.