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 : VISX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Andrew Abrams who wrote (740)	10/28/1998 6:11:00 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 1754

Please educate me. I've heard of VISX but have not followed it closely. What is this "Hyperopia" that you are talking about and when is it expected to get FDA approval? Also, does anyone know how much VISX has to pay for Nidek's legal fees? And finaly, who are VISX's main competitors and what are the barriers to entry here? Thanks in advance Sun Tzu

To: Andrew Abrams who wrote (740)	10/28/1998 7:45:00 PM
From: Vector1	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1754

Fron HQ: - We feel strongly that this U.K. ruling is not a reliable indicator of what will happen in the U.S. First, patent laws differ by country, and patent rulings by U.K. courts in particular do not generally create strong precedents in other European countries or in the U.S. To cite a particular example which applies here, a key VISX patent was found by the U.K. court to be invalid because there may have been a public disclosure of the covered invention about a month prior to the filing of the patent. In Europe, a patent must be filed within one month after the first public disclosure, but in the U.S., there is a one year "grace period." Thus, in the U.S., Nidek would not benefit from this technicality. - Second, the patents themselves differ by country, even when much the same technology which is covered. Many of VISX's strongest patents in the U.S. are method patents, which are not even applicable in most other countries. - We do expect Nidek to receive FDA approval this quarter and to begin marketing in the U.S. without a license from VISX and without charging a procedure fee to its customers. We also believe that VISX may be able to obtain a preliminary injunction against Nidek, which would be a huge victory for VISX. If VISX is not able to take Nidek off the market right away, VISX will have to convince potential Nidek customers that the risk of treble damages due to willful infringement is too great to justify the purchase of a Nidek laser without a VISX license. At stake is VISX's ability to maintain or grow its market share and to charge a $250 fee per procedure in a market where a competitor is not charging a per-procedure fee at all. - We believe that VISX has a broad and deep patent portfolio which should position the company well with respect to new competitors in the U.S., such as Nidek. However, we acknowledge that the controversy which will result from both Nidek's U.S. approval and the start of the FTC's hearing regarding allegations of patent fraud by VISX could make for an uncertain climate for the stock over the near term. - ecommendation: We maintain our Strong Buy rating on VISX stock based on the belief that the company will prevail in the patent-related issues at hand. We anticipate that dips like the one we saw yesterday, if based on confusion over complex patent issues, could create buying opportunities. VISX, Inc. develops, manufactures, and markets excimer lasers for the correction of refractive disorders of the eye, such as nearsightedness and astigmatism. The company owns the most fundamental intellectual property in the industry, is