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: Hippieslayer who wrote (11392)	11/18/1997 10:36:00 PM
From: Henry Niman	Respond to of 32384

FUGAZI, I think that you are confusing a scientific publication with a popular press article. The three articles I mentioned are in the popular press. Those article usually begin with a reporter interviewing someone at the company. The reporter then may or may not use the info and an editor may or may not publish the story. The three upcoming articles are for the popular press and have little to do with research at LGND. They are simply reviews for the general public. Scientific articles are very different. LGND scientists and consultants publish articles almost daily. They come out all of the time. Some are a bigger deal than others. One article that was a big deal was the Nature article that came out last March on the effectiveness of Targretin and LGD1268 in mouse models of type II diabetes. It was on the data presented at the Bear Stearns conference of Sept 12, 1996 and when I asked IR about its publication, I was told that it would be coming out in Nature. In that case I did do some research and did verify when it would coming out and mentioned it in my "March Madness" posts. I expected a press release to accompany its release and thought it would be a big deal, which it was, although the market was so weak at the time that LGND's price only spiked. I mentioned the upcoming "popular press" articles in the context of a lot of news in the near term. As verified by LGND's IR, quite a bit of news is stacking up. I said that the wires would be on fire, and these three papers would add to the publicity. I don't expect these publications to have anything "new" and I don't expect any press releases on the articles.

To: Hippieslayer who wrote (11392)	11/18/1997 10:39:00 PM
From: Andrew H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

>> Do you think it is ethical to post something that can not be confirmed without a doubt?<< Well, Fugazi, we certainly can't confirm your opinions without a doubt, but I don't think its unethical to post them. It is entirely ethical to post something that cannot be confirmed without a doubt, since that constitutes about 95% of all posts. It is unethical only if one presents as verified fact that which is not. >>Would you have also been so quick to defend someone else if they had posted that same info yet not have it materialize?<< Probably not, because no one else on this thread has contibuted 1/10 the informational value that Henry has. >>But you and other sure go a long way to defend his every act with out a word of question. That frankly scares me.<< Well, you are easily scared. I am not defending his every act. I am disagreeing with your charactarization and interpretation of his actions.Vehemently so. I think you have trouble distinguishing between fact, information and rumor. But that's your problem. >>Being that he is a professor with ties to LGND, could we not rule out that he would have been floated the journal articles before the publication date. I know they exist.<< You know what exists? What are you talking about? Are you saying you know the journal articles you are accusing Henry of falsely promoting actually exist? >>Your statement of <<He (Henry) communicates it to us in that fashion, so we know it is not a verified act....that often his "information" does not quite mesh with the standards held by a professor.<< Your language here is garbled. I never said "his information does not mesh with the standards held by a professor." That is you speaking. Please don't put your garbage in my mouth. You are again having difficulty distinguishing between fact and rumor. >>If I'm out of line with my points, tell me, but give me good reasons as to why Henry was responsible in posting what he did, not the "Well, he was right about X, therefore we'll believe him on Y"<< You have every right to express your opinion. I would only suggest that since you are in graduate school, you take some time to learn about what constitutes fact and what constitutes everything else. That is all I have to say to you. I will let others who are more interested in your posts respond to you.

To: Hippieslayer who wrote (11392)	11/18/1997 10:56:00 PM
From: squetch	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32384

>> give me good reasons as to why Henry was responsible in posting what he did<<I appreciate the effort, and I am sick of people trying to protect the world from Henry. If people can't think for themselves that is their problem. If they act like rats following the Pied Piper, that is their problem. If people make bad decisions on what Henry posts, that is their problem. If people get to exuberant, that is their problem. You, I and Henry can post whatever we want. I have faith that individuals can make decisions on their own. I have faith individuals can assess the credibility and veracity of individual posters. I have faith that individuals can separate rumor form fact. In a weird way I respect tonyt b/c I see him as being "reflective" and I know he at least reads the thread. Regards, squetch

To: Hippieslayer who wrote (11392)	11/19/1997 12:25:00 AM
From: Flagrante Delictu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

FUGAZI, >> ...but don't tell me that you honestly want someone to give you "my secret source tells me ......" line and take that as "valuable information".<< If you know that you shouldn't have taken what Henry gave you from what he eventually described as "a very reliable source" & taken that as "valuable information" ,why are you complaining? Did you take it as "valuable information"? Did you try to trade on that information & lose money? Is that why you are shifting responsibility on Henry? Does it weigh too much on your own shoulders? In the midst of her tantrum on our thread, Courtney prescribed that we "chill out" from our" psychotic" condition. Bernie.