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 : Guilford (GLFD) - Steadily Rising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve who wrote (256)	11/20/1998 10:39:00 PM
From: Merritt	Respond to of 496

Steve: Patents aren't toilet paper...you'd be rightfully disgusted if GLFD didn't protect their future products by getting them. As for the sale of the company to a large entity...have you ever heard of dilution? What you seem to be looking for is a PFE or SGP. Maybe that's where you should put your money. Those are good companies, but you don't have the potential bang-for-your-buck that you have with GLFD. I'm not a current shareholder, but I like the company and have traded it...and will again, I imagine.

To: Steve who wrote (256)	11/21/1998 2:14:00 PM
From: NeuroInvestment	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 496

There are some misconceptions stated in this message: 1) It was not Amgen that came up with the second generation neuroimmunophilins, one of which has replaced GPI-1046. I was hearing about these from Guilford in spring 1997, before the AMGN collaboration. It was GLFD's expertise that led to the expansion of the neuroimmunophilin portfolio. 2) The current state of the Big Pharma collaboration market is that it is a buyer's market. Big Pharma companies are offering piddling royalty rates (5-6%) for products that have not yet demonstrated proof of principle in humans--i.e. Phase II. Unless Guilford can get a decent royalty rate (at least in the 10-12% range) now, they are indeed better off putting some of their considerable cash resources (130million plus) into early human trials. Anticipated European and Canadian approvals in 1999 for Gliadel should also bring around $11 million in milestones, plus increased royalties. Partnering out of desperation is the lot of several of the neuro companies I follow, it is not necessary for Guilford. 3) To complain about 'gaps in product development' is a conceptual fallacy when it comes to biopharm--it is not like a car company that chooses to roll out a new model, or not. Gliadel is generating modest revenues to help support the R&D side, which again is more than most small neuropharm companies can say. Like Neurex, Guilford is a more advanced small cap that could be appealing to a buyer, and if a firm made an offer comparable to what Elan did with Neurex, Craig Smith would listen. But to put the company on the block in this environment would be absurd. NeuroInvestment (www.neuroinv.com)