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 : Ligand (LGND) Breakout! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mudcat who wrote (20670)	5/13/1998 11:12:00 AM
From: tonyt	Respond to of 32384

> I asked the same question recently: > Message 4420337 The responses you received were interesting: exchange2000.com exchange2000.com Perhaps henry can get an explaination for us for the drastic reduction in estimates.

To: Mudcat who wrote (20670)	5/13/1998 12:17:00 PM
From: Henry Niman	Respond to of 32384

The same questions are being asked over and over and the story is unchanged. The projection of $0.84 came out March 29, 1998. (see home.att.net for details). It was not a typo. It was supported by revenue of over $130 million for 1999. It was a spot report with no discussion of the revenue or the estimate. However, it was not a typo (the same numbers reappeared in several H&Q reports earlier this month as well as Zack's and other services that cover brokerage ratings - the data was also confirmed by my H&Q broker as well as the lack of discussion at the morning meeting on the day that the spot report with the $0.84 projection was issued. Yesterday a new spot report came out. Revenue was reduced to about $100 million (which is still a very large increase over 1998 projections) and 1999 earnings were revised to $0.11 which was "in line" with others. Yesterday's spot report was on the SRGN acquisition and it was cited as the reason for revisions (which included more shares). There was no explanation for the projected revenue reduction (from $130 million to $100 million). H&Q likes to do M&A. They were involved in the GLYC acquisition. They were not involved in the SRGN acquisition. They thought that LGND paid full value for SRGN (LGND used Bear Stearns and SRGN used Lehman and both still give LGND their highest rating). As far as I know, H&Q has never given LGND a STRONG BUY, although I think that they almost did when BARS initiated coverage in Nov, 1996 (at least that is what they told me). I'm not sure if there is any relationship between any of the above.