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 : IVAX Insider Trading -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: flickerful who wrote (597)	3/23/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: 5,17,37,5,101,...	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 756

Terms? I like the terms for NPRO. I don't know what Ivax paid for the shares but I bet it was no less than $6.00. NPRO gets its shares back cheaply. On the other hand, that much alluded to 10/97 Oppenheimer report valued Paxene at roughly $300,000,000.00. Seems to me that $12 million or so is a small pence to pay for royalty rights. Apparently the market thinks both companies win. By the way I always like a company that deals to get its shares back from large holders while the company is in distress. After all, NPRO could have said keep the shares; we need the cash. IMCL is in Phase III trial for a drug to treat small cell cancer. I don't know which is more prevalent or lethal, small or large cell lung cancer. Our riveting question is ... drum roll please.. why didn't Frosty and cronies at Ivax initiate trials using Paxene against large cell cancer instead of K-S for which BM-S held trump card? And our answer is... drum roll please ... Frosty and cronies at Ivax were too busy collecting big paychecks and daydreaming about IvAm to care much about things like drugs and shareholder value. The fact is they thought Bergen Brunswick would own Ivax and its useless drug by midsummer 97 and didn't give half a flip about orphan status of paclitaxel. The guys at BB were a bit too smart. Jackson