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 : VD's Model Portfolio & Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Robert K. who wrote (5374)	7/27/1998 6:29:00 PM
From: Peter Singleton	Respond to of 9719

Robert K, << So just for the record Rick and Rocket, if a molecule could do this [all these things] then whats that molecule worth? You know where I am coming from >> hmmmm .... I haven't the foggiest Peter btw, I glanced at your profile. there are a gazillion posts to the XOMA thread. Did you know someone's been posting there using your account? : )

To: Robert K. who wrote (5374)	7/27/1998 9:47:00 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 9719

Bob: E5 was good too. Until is wasn't. So was anti-CD5-RTA. So was the melanoma antibody. So was anti-collorectal. So were the T cell idiotypes. Remember when Vector Securities was retained to find a marketing partner for rBPI-23?? You're not among the 95% of biotech investors that will think that "23" is a typo. That's how XOMA, IMO, has survived...... short memories, insufficient research (in every meaning of the phrase). BPI.... depends.... if you can't find an indication where it works and where there is a decent number of patients (meningococcus doesn't count), it's not worth much. How many shares eventually spilled out of the Shipley Raidy deal, 11/23/93? How many shares will eventually shake free from the Shipley Raidy deal, 6/29/98? In my old posts to the XOMA thread, how many shares did I say would be outstanding by the time, if and when, we got to "approvable" data for bpi? How are we doing thus far? What did I say about the effects of dilution on the eventual bang, if and when, for bpi approval? As time elapses and the funding gets innovative, a partnership gets built into a share price that is not all that different from the current one. That research premium isn't exactly small, you realize?? This was all predicted. It's sort of like Ligand..... it was very easy to look at these business plans a few years ago and say "abusive dilution is coming". I said it "when", and I haven't heard any "good call, Rick" from either camp. Must admit, however, that you came close once. A question for you..... you license a molecule for sepsis, and you cut it up and find portions that are active in every assay you test. Why would you cut it up and test in other systems in the first place? Does AMGN cut up epo and look to see if a portion will clean kitchen sinks? I guess that, without G-CSF, it could have made them look like they weren't a one product company? Think about it.... the "unusually rich source of biologically-active peptides" observation was made in 1994. Not exactly flying, huh? You license a molecule to do one thing, and now you find that it does several. If I licensed a molecule to bleach cotton, and then I told you later that it is also good as a diet supplement for sheep, how would you feel about the cotton project? Brings up my favorite Pat Scannon story.... just after arriving at XOMA, in November 1986, I took my boss (Patrick Trown, now at ONXX) to Seattle to meet with Drs. Ed Clark and Mike Gallatin. I was interested in licenses to complement the crappy projects that were in-house when I arrived. Dr. Clark introduced us to anti-B7 (he was first to define the molecule, using a monoclonal) and other agonistic antibodies, while Dr. Gallatin was eager to collaborate on anti-leukocyte homing. Dr. Trown and I arrived back in Berkeley very enthused; Patrick was hot on the work of Gallatin, and I wanted to work with anti-B7 and other agonistic antibodies. We debriefed Dr. Scannon, and I still remember his strange (IMO) response....... after hearing of B7 and integrins, seemingly out of nowhere, he asked if we thought that an anti-CD4 ricin A chain conjugate would make a good immunotoxin. I laughed incredulously as Patrick and I walked back to our research building, the parking lot of which was eventually replaced with a plant designed for E5 scale-up. Instead of funding either project at Univ. Washington, XOMA supported the work of Lowell Young, inventor of E5. B7 and CTLA4 have become a focus at several companies, Bristol-Myers Squibb in particular. Dr. Gallatin is Vice President and Scientific Director of ICOS, and has been at ICOS since it initiated R&D activities in 1990. 1990...... yes, XOMA could have had a 3-4 year head start on integrins and inflammation. So..... why, after all those projects and all that wasted money, do you still want to invest in this one product company that is trying to look like a multiple product company? How many times were you told that the INCY patents wouldn't be a hindrance? To answer your question directly...... I don't know. I really hope that bpi works for trauma. If it doesn't, let's bury this company and consider it one of the most sordid stories in biotech. Let's not let them get away with one more effort to float some other "product". fun flashes from the past...... "The closest thing to a slam dunk in biotech." "This verdict establishes that XOMA will be successful. The only question now is, how successful?" Rick