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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bill Wexler's Profits of DOOM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CMason who wrote (174)	2/27/1998 2:40:00 AM
From: Stephen How	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4634

IRC chat on my server! Here's an example: Instead of having a slow, inefficient argument with these SI posts, let's get together on IRC on my server. I proposed this a while back on the BTIM thread, but only Jim Roof joined in. I thought it was useful. Here's the log of our exchange: btim.dyn.ml.org Let's try to pre-arrange a time to meet in the chatroom. You can point your favorite IRC client to: btim.dyn.ml.org:6667 You can create a new channel (#) using the /join command. For example, try '/join BTIM'. I'll be logged in, but probably away. Steve

To: CMason who wrote (174)	2/27/1998 4:06:00 PM
From: Jim Roof	Respond to of 4634

<<the studies quoted were (it seems to me, deliberately) powered to show equivalence, not superiority, to anything currently on the market. Accordingly, BTIM will have to do additional studies to prove anything for any commercial or regulatory purpose. Meanwhile, since ABT already owns the reference product, why would they promote BTIM's instead?>> Good questions and good observations. I too noted that the trials were designed to show equivalency and not superiority. But I also take notice of the half dozen or so favorable 'inclinations' that failed to reach statistical significance and the lack of 'disinclinations' that might have favored the generic hetastarch. Ie., though not totally statistically conclusive, Hextend showed across the board trends towards superiority. If these trends were strictly the result of sampling error then I would find it difficult to make the bearish assumption that it was just chance. Given that there were so many numbers that tilted in favor of Hextend the chances of this being just sampling error seem slight. Had sampling error been at play then I would have figured at least one or two areas where Hespan would show superiority. The only areas that seem superior for Hespan at first glance are the platelet and hemaglobin numbers but I have already addressed the fact that this is actually a positive for Hextend. Second, you ask a very good question. Why would Abbott get involved at all with Biotime since they have a product similar already on the market? The most bullish scenario is that they view Hextend as a superior formulation and are willing to pay for the NA rights to its distribution. The bearish scenario is that they wish only to tie Biotime up and not let them release this product at all. Now, that begs the question - "Why would they want to control Hextend if it is not a viable product?". I would think they would wish it upon their competition to get involved with Biotime. But they chose rather to invest in it. I know that such agreements are commonplace (I am also a Vical investor and have other research pharmaceuticals in my portfolio). But most of these contracts fail at the phase I or phase II level and milestones are never reached. Hextend is a shoe-in for approval. <<the key parties in BTIM appear not to have come to the party with clean hands. Their previous company blew up in the context of very serious questions.>> Please correct me here if I am wrong, but Alan Ableson brought that up in his Barron's article of last year. The company responded with a timeline of the events in question and defended themselves with the fact that the principals of Biotime had left by the time things got nasty. I do not remember the particulars of the case but the gist was that they were not even present when the shenanigans got going. <<Jim, it is my view that you are probably a paid influencer for BTIM.>> I am a real purist when it comes to argument. You actually have no view of who I am or what I am doing but you are entitled to an opinion. Views are reserved for those who have knowledge. I can understand your opinion and I am complemented by your assessment. The thought had never occurred to me that I could be paid for this - hmmmm.... Actually, the only money I make is when the stock goes up. BTW, I do appreciate your civil tone and your integrity statement. I try to do the same as well. Though at this point I don't think it necessary to identify myself as a BTIM long! Take care, Jim