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 : momo-T/FIF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John McCarthy who wrote (3159)	9/21/2005 7:41:30 AM
From: quidditch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12215

John, cool post. While I don't read Wildest's posts everyday, I should, for their liter- ary structure and whimsy, as well as for their bio-technical ele- ments, some of which surpass my sadly limited horizons. How you guys zero in, and then drill down, on some of these smal- ler plays really amazes me. Absent a compelling reason to believe in the science of the early stages--by definition without yet having the proof of concept or clinical support to buoy your belief and your bets-- what clinches the pied piper's muse? Still more, at these early stages is not there plenty of room for these pipers to be unreliable, if not down- right unsavory, managers, where the clinical trials might reveal flaws in the story? Amazing. quid

To: John McCarthy who wrote (3159)	9/21/2005 12:07:30 PM
From: keokalani'nui	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12215

John, I didn't have a strong feeling about NTII before I read the transcript, nor after, and I have not looked at NTII in depth at all. I was sniffing around to see what was up with the strategic move to unload the P3 product to a financial flipper. I was just giving a pointer to the transcript. The small remark I made had to do with the the market size and other more or less (IMO) shallow comments. First the CEO threw around '500m to a billion', which sounds to me to be preposterous by range and optimism. Then later on I think he settled on $400m. Judge for yourself, I think this sounds goofy, as did the unecessary and vacuous snake inventory comments: Paul Freiman: OK. Fine. So what does that do to our forecast? It doesn’t do a heck of a lot. We think this product has somewhere between a half a billion, and a billion dollar potential. And that’s based on the fact that with a drug that may not be ideal called TPA which has a three hour time window, that only permits up to five percent of the patients available to be treated, and that product is doing about $80 some-odd-million for stroke. We think with a six hour time window, and we hope a more benign safety profile, that we have the potential to bring in anywhere between 20 and 30 percent of the patients at stroke. And just on a straight line from the five to the 25, it seems to me you’re up around 400 million at that point. So, you know, in my own mind, and this is not an official forecast, I think it’s about a half a billion dollar drug. [Admittedly, underlying my listening, was this: So, like, ABT/Knoll just threw away a billion dollar drug after having succeeded in TWO trials and all you had to do was look at the randomization and protocol to figure out why it failed in Europe?] BTW, I wasn't making an investment call--which I usually do more clearly. But even when I don't own a stock if I hear that off-key tone from management I'll mention it. Whereas Friedmand was way to breezy and confident for my taste, for example aria's conference calls sound so strained and tension-filled that I stay away from aria as well no matter how promising mTOR is. This is NOT Graham and Dodd analysis! Please don't take me for more than I am and it will do you no harm. Final comment: It was a great strategic move to get the cash to (almost) finish the P3 stroke program. Final final (should have made this first overall): Diversification, oxygen and water are essential to life.