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 : VVUS: VIVUS INC. (NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RT who wrote (5603)	2/22/1998 6:17:00 PM
From: blankmind	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23519

RT, 1. I'll accept your numbers: a. 4,800 refills per week b. 500,000 scripts per year - total 2. Your numbers mean that Vivus can sit back, run one plant, and do close to 250,000 scrips per year in refills. 3. That would probably make Vivus profitable and the envy of the drug industry. 4. My point is that you complain that the reorders aren't high enough. Imagine a raving lunatic complaining that McDonald's isn't serving enough french fries to justify having 2,000 restaurants open in the United States. And that's how you're coming across. If not, then what's your rationale for complaining that the refill rate isn't high enough? out.

To: RT who wrote (5603)	2/22/1998 7:34:00 PM
From: Cacaito	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23519

RT, it appears to be that the script data is not so accurate. I do not think that the real number is even close to the 70% of total unit sales a month mentioned before (from DR Bond if I remember well). MissLil correctly said that the "new" prescriptions are not necessarily new patients (as many has understood the data), but exactly new prescriptions to "old" or "new" patients. If a doctor prescribes, he could order several refills, some pharmacy plans are for up to 6 month of refills (this decreases the visits to the physician (HMOs and other insurances love less visits since it implies less costs). An "old" patient could get a new prescription, I doubt that the data could differentiate between the "old new prescription" and the "new new prescription", maybe there are logistical and privacy matters about this, this is just guessing. Blankmind is correct in not assigning a lot of interest to match the $125 million year sales, the almost a million unit (or more) ability to be produced in a month, and the only 15,000 prescriptions a week (new and refills) from the script data. Obviously, the $125 millions in 1997 sales is very real and that is what blankmind cares about, me too. The script data is fun to watch, but do not get crazy about it, even Dr Bond (the main fan of the script data)could not explain the discrepancies, Tunica "spin" was very positive, MissLil could not explained it, neither can I, neither blanckmind. I will wait for earnings report day which is much more accurate, and if the MCA happens the earnings are going to be an explosion.