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 : Zonagen (zona) - good buy? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dante Sinferno who wrote (893)	11/23/1997 12:43:00 PM
From: F. Jay Abella, III	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 7041

Hi All: Just to clarify the confusion, I meant exactly what I said in my piece. To quote myself (sorry) "The purpose of this piece is not to debate the merits or demerits of the data for Vasomax. Having never seen them at Westergaard, and questioning how others may have been privy to them, we leave the final arbitration to the FDA (and not Wall Street). In our opinion, companies who are structured like ZONA are prone to attract short sellers like Asensio because the risk/reward ratio of a long position is skewed with respect to the probability of the drug concept never reaching market, especially at a late stage. With the long history of biotech blowups, why would Asensio not take a short position in any development stage biotech company that was nearing an FDA decision on its product?" This has nothing to do with whether or not I think ZONA is fairly valued. It asks a question that, frankly, does not get asked enough in biotech. The risk in holding shares of companies structured like ZONA, for many investors, outweighs the rewards on the upside. I have written extensively about why I think this is so. HOWEVER, I AM NOT SAYING THAT ANY OTHER INDIVIDUAL'S RISK/REWARD PROFILE SHOULD BE ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY. I HOPE EVERYONE IN THE STOCK GETS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT OUT OF IT, BUT REALIZE THAT THE CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING ZONA MAKES THIS IMPOSSIBLE. I hope I have neither endorsed, nor condemned, ZONA, Asensio, or anyone on this board. FJA PS - If IBD is right, and 100,000 pages of the NDA (times 5 copies) is necessary = 500k pages. That is roughly a 300 volume NDA. How long will this take SGP to perform appropriate statistical analysis, write study reports, integrate each into an ISS and ISE, compile and orchestrate the NDA and submit it to the FDA? Will it be before the 180 day review period for Pfizer is up next spring? Without an equity position in ZONA, and a small upfront payment, does SGP even have the incentive to bust ass to get it done? If the NDA is submitted after PFE's 180 days, will ZONA still get fast track status, or will the application get reviewed at the whim of the Agency? These are the questions I would be asking if I were you all......To me, each indicates LOTS of risk to undertake for a $32 stock. And honestly, who really knows the answers.........I know I don't, and wouldn't care to guess at these levels.