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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maxer who wrote (5106)	12/13/1997 11:19:00 AM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Max, got to the Lancet article you posted. Thanks again. On the updates of the web pages I have admitted to myself that the problem is not XOMA but myself. No matter how often the site would be updated I would want it dome more frequently. I would settle for not using words like, "shortly", when refering to how soon it will be updated. The underwriters are pimps. Xoma, is not one of their bitches. While these underwriters at times mention a non house pick it is usually a big co that carries name recognition and some class that they apparently hope will make their own stable look better by association. As to letters and advisors, Xoma has at least three of the top biotech letter wrters recomending it as well as Michael Gianturco. About a year ago someone posted a list that seemed to include even more. If I am so happy why does it seem I'm always complaining? Appearances can be decieving. I don't believe someone like Sturza or really any letter writer or advisor can be forced to write a non paid for letter, and I know no one on this thread does. I urge that we contact any appropriate people that we might know and ask them not to recomend Xoma but how they analyze biotechs. Do they us the patent web sites? How or what value do they give to patents, etc. (am doing this and I do point out that while it is simplistic I tend to favor co that are very active in obtaining patents, and mention XOMA). The are many other issues, such as how do they track institutional ownership, is it good or bad. Licenses, how does one know how iportant they are, percents not disclosed. Yes,mentioning Xoma and IDEC & Genentech. While I want what you want and that is more peole to recomend XOMA all I thin we might and it is a big MIGHT since even it is perhaps impossibles to get more people to at least look at Xomas, patents,license agreements, institutonal ownership, trials, or whatever you can convince them is an area that should be looked at. Also think the question should be sincere. I need lot of help understanding the patents let alone how one factors in value for them or even if one should. I would prefer a letter writer that covered that area to that did not.

To: Maxer who wrote (5106)	12/13/1997 11:53:00 AM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 17367

Max, Sorry or the long post and the errors I could not edit. Murphy will possibly mention Xoma at lunch but he is at a meeting where other biotechs are presenting. Xoma presented last year. Think the cos presnting pay for the oportunity to present but am not sure think is correct. H & Q has it's conference in mid Jan. I do not know if XOMA is presenting with the other 200 cos but my mother keeps saying they are. On web sites I remain convinced XOMA has one of the best. Thats a question for analyst. Do they use co web sites? What do they expect should be included? Which are some of the best? Have they seen the XOMA site? Do they know it includes scientific presentations? Martin explained why some abstracts do not appear. Most conferences do demand abstracts, but if your really a hot item they want you even if you are to busy to send one. So then one has a choice, do you gto the person that is doing things that are more importand and insist that they deal wth essentially a paper work issue for an event that has already occured. BTW E. Martin used none of these words. This is my own concept of what she did or did not say.<g>