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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (10373)	10/29/1997 8:41:00 PM
From: squetch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

TD I hope you are joking. squetch

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (10373)	10/29/1997 8:46:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

>>After going on another thread and posting what I thought was an interesting take on the tough market enviroment that the company would be facing in the future, I received death threats and had it confirmed numerous times what my wife has been telling me for over 20 years is really the truth. That being I am a worthless no good liar, an idiot, and will never make it in life. << Well, maybe your wife is right. After all, you sold your LGND. That seems to confirm the analysis. (:>) Would you sight the posts for me? I"ll check it out. You should remember if you go onto a thread of a stock which has taken quite a dive and where people have lost a lot of money, and then explain to them why the stock will continue to do poorly in the future, then you will probably get a nasty reaction. >> In addition, I had been seen in a sheep field not counting sheep.<< Death threats are one thing, but that is really in poor taste, especially for a Texan. Everyone knows Texans prefer longhorns. (:>) >>Now that I've said it, please understand that even though I have the word Texas in my name, I actually live in Boulder, Colorado and I go for walks each day in the mountains, I sleep late on many occasions, and my heart is in Hawaii with my dog, Dogface.<< Now, TD, are you making fun of me? You'd never catch me in a sheep field, nor do I have any inclinations in regard to dogface (small d). I'm a plant lover myself, although I do have a great fondness for cats. As for Millenium, I haven't looked closely at them. Does sound like a lot of money coming in IF they meet their milestones--what sorts of royalties are they getting? As to their share price, that is irrelevant without knowing their market cap. How many shares do they have outstanding? We do have very high expectations in regard to LGND. And I think many of us were disappointed that we did not go a lot higher with the LLY diabetes deal. But there is a lot of good news to come over the next few months, although we may have been robbed of the P2 diabetes news. I suggest you wait until the end of January to reevaluate. By then much of the news should be out, all the bio conferences will be over and we should have all the upgrades that may be coming in the near future. LGND is still a development stage biotech with the many attendant risks. Although it is a lot less risky now than a year ago. So, one should be well diversified.

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (10373)	10/29/1997 8:52:00 PM
From: Dom B.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

Hey TEX..don't those wimps know you eat bullets for bkfast? And I'm talking big, here. 50 cal. wheaties!!! not those puny 9mm parabellums. hehehe... Re" Millenium v. Ligand - think the market is diferrent? Relax kid and enjoy the aspens...//dom

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (10373)	10/29/1997 10:23:00 PM
From: tdinovo	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 32384

Tex, If you really want to get sick, look at Millennium's chart. Back in early September, you could have bought the stock for around $13. And its bounced off against 21-22 several times and can't get through. Much like Ligand, Millennium began its move well in advance of the announcement, which likewise was an anti-climax. Guilford, the beneficiary of Amgen's largess, has seen its valuation cut by a third since that announcement. Guilford's trajectory was a little more abrupt, but that probably suggests fewer people were involved and/or the deal was hatched rather quickly. BTW, there's nothing wrong with your logic. The major problem development stage bios face is they "eat like a snake". That's a hopefully comical way of saying they live from one deal (or press release) to the next. After they've "eaten", skepticism sets in and there seems to be a period where they shrink back down to an equilibrium size (price). I'm afraid these characteristics comes with the territory. IMO, we can not possibly compete with those institutional folks, whose performance is measured on a quarter-to-quarter basis, on an information basis. As much as we think we are "in the know", the truth is we're closer to the end of the information chain, at least relative to business factors. If you think about it seriously, who on the thread could call Susan Atkins and ask for a private lunch with David Robinson "to discuss business". We would get a polite but firm rejoinder that his schedule does not permit. Let one of the fund managers from Fidelity, the largest institutional holder, make a similar request, and the answer becomes "when can you work lunch into your schedule". This isn't bad or good. It's simply the realty of investing in this sector. The real value of the thread has more to do with Henry and his considerable and patient efforts to reduce truly complex science to understandable proportions. But anyone that thinks these observations will move the stock to the next level is dreaming . Science doesn't move stocks; predictable earnings do. And the closer and more certain a company is to actually counting the cash, the better the stock acts. But the available appreciation is likewise limited because the potential results are "obvious". Our best hope is to buy and hold for the long-term based on a realistic and considered judgment of the underlying science. This implies riding out some gut-wrenching dips and then waiting for an eternity for the price to recover as our institutional friends move in and out of the stock several times. But I strongly feel that's the right way to play this sector. Some people are very adroit traders. (Tex, your recent "sin" suggests you understand more about that side than I do.) But many others put their brokers in yachts and end with broken dreams for their efforts. Sorry to be waxing so philosophical. The action the last several days has been quite sobering, even though I went through '72-74 and '87. At times like this, I think its important to focus on why we are making these investment and what a realistic time horizon should be. Ted

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (10373)	10/29/1997 11:11:00 PM
From: lavalamp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

OFF TOPIC Tex, It seems clear to me you consumed the prize right before you wrote that piece of ____.<G> I guess you don't think the 4 remaining folks have a chance of winning it since you drank it:> I did think the comment to the Cymer longs about backing an armored truck up to their house and filling it up with their money was maybe just a tad over zealous on your part;) I recommend you might want to act like another of our Texas favorite animals (the armadillo)which curls up in a ball when attacked<VBG>