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 : Agouron Pharmaceuticals (AGPH) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JOHN W. who wrote (3016)	11/27/1997 10:34:00 AM
From: sam	Respond to of 6136

From the article I posted SFM appears to have purchased approximately 600,000 last quarter (ending Sept. 30, 1997) for an ending total of 622,400. In other words, SFM owned about 20,000 shares and added 600,000 to that amount. It appears I was wrong when I said SFM doubled its position (it appears to have increased it several thousand percent). Sorry for any confusion caused by my haste to copy the last message. All this said, the post that I copied may be an outright fabrication -- I don't yet have any way of knowing. In other words, I have NOT been able to verify the information anywhere else. SFM apparently does not file electronically with the SEC -- or at least not that I've found.

To: JOHN W. who wrote (3016)	11/30/1997 3:06:00 AM
From: George T. Santamaria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6136

In a roundabout way, I think that your are saying that the financial press is either stupid or very corrupt. It is probably giving the editor of Barron's too much credit to accuse them of being corrupt. Their staff manages to write very slanted articles, I think, because they very naive. They quote various sources without even considering what their agenda is. I am still baffled as to why so much money is IMO naively playing the short side of AGPH. Some of the possibilities that I see are: 1. Some short investors probably know patients who did not succeed in therapy with Viracept. They figure that it's just a big hoax. 2. There are a number of academic researchers out there who are trying to get aids research funded. Part of their agenda is to discredit PIs. They truly believe that PIs are worthless and they tell their friends, some who invest, that. 3. They figure that Viracept will have the same growth pattern as Crix did. i.e., AGPH will make good money for only a year or so from Viracept. Someone like Vertex may come up with a better potion. 4. HIV develops resistance to all PIs and it is only a matter of time before resistant strains will emerge. This possibility has been recognized since Phase II testing -- no news here. It would be appreciated if others on this thread could add to this list.