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 : Immunomedics (IMMU) - moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bobbseytwins2001 who wrote (38510)	1/7/2017 6:43:25 PM
From: sogwap1	1 Recommendation Recommended By erippetoe Respond to of 63291

If you buy Geico you can save a lot on your car insurance ?

To: bobbseytwins2001 who wrote (38510)	1/7/2017 6:50:32 PM
From: dorightbythem	Respond to of 63291

"So what are we missing this time?" Not trying to be sarcastic, this is open ended and as cryptic as the post, so what are you trying to suggest that the Company and Greenhill are trying to accomplish ? How do you arrive at a conclusion without looking at the history of Greenhill Transactions ? Greenhill Recent Healthcare Transactions History : 1. Shareholder Activist Response greenhill.com 2. Financing and Restructuring greenhill.com 3. Mergers and Acquisitions greenhill.com 4. Special Committee Advisory greenhill.com Analytical choices: 0 or null the Company does nothing. Results run out of cash prior to receiving AA and not enough cash to fund a Phase 3 trial for 132 1 Sell more shares . 2 Finance more debt. 3 Partner a compound. 4 Sell portions of the pipe outright. 5 Split the company into two separate entities and sell one of the two. 6 Sell the Company. (Not enough info to do C/B Analysis) I'm sure there are others but you are hinting at something else.

To: bobbseytwins2001 who wrote (38510)	1/7/2017 7:44:15 PM
From: kdd999	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 63291

I have owned stocks in 2 companies that were taken control of by Carl Icahn, one in 2007 ish, one in 2010 ish. In both cases, he started out as shareholder, like myself. He then put in his board and mgmt. Then he did bonds to loan company money. He loaned less than book value of assets. I continued holding shares because I had done my dd, and it looked to me like the companies both had good potential for decent mgmt to solve their problems, they did not look like they were headed for bk. His mgmt drove companies unnecessarily into bankruptcy (screwed around so sales were way down and they couldn't make bond pmts). So as a shareholder, he and I both lost all. BUT HE OWNED THE BONDS which were less than the value of the assets in bk and more than his stock holdings. He extends date on bonds, negotiates asset sales, ends up with bonds that are still good plus a big share of the new company that emerges out of bk. I end up with 0. He ends up with something he can recapitalize and do ipo or sell assets to competitors after ripping off shareholders in bk court. The power of great lawyers!! That is why I would run if Carl were in the picture. I don't think VB sounds as much like rapacious slimeballs as I-CON, and they don't have cash to play his game.But such things can happen. I do believe that we will end up in bk with goldenberg, but it might be slower, giving us a chance to bail. I would like to be more optimistic, but when companies dig holes this deep, it really is a high risk game, no matter who is in control. Indeed, issuing bonds against the assets may be the way vb chooses to finance. If that happens, I will exit quickly as I won't revisit that path. I hope 132 does really well really soon so that the new board will have decent options. The G's should be as scared as I am. I know they can collude behind the scenes to protect their wealth, but it isn't something you can brag about to the neighbors, although I guess the top .01% probably doesn't care how you got your $, just that you have it.