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: medsunman who wrote (27375)	1/12/1999 2:00:00 PM
From: Henry Niman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

medsunman, I agree with both of your posts. The Targretin news on diabetes has been discussed on this board many times, including the possibility that Targretin would not be used for diabetes, but would be used for advanced breast cancer. The diabetes program, because of the triglyceride levels (also discussed MANY times here before), would skip the first generation rexinoid (Targretin), and go directly to second generation (LGD1268 or LGD1324). I suspect that some of the moaners and groaners were so busy groaning and moaning about the "hype" on the board, that they actually missed the news, which was posted here 6-12 months ago. As far as new news is concerned, if LGND had new news, there would have been a press released BEFORE the presentation, just as there was for the news (presented at Bear Stearns) which gave rise to the first post on this thread).

To: medsunman who wrote (27375)	1/12/1999 2:21:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

Appreciated your post. Any comments on the general tone of the conference would also be welcome. Is attendance down in general? Are attendees upbeat?

To: medsunman who wrote (27375)	1/12/1999 3:37:00 PM
From: RXGOLF	Respond to of 32384

Thanks for your time and view of what you have heard at H&Q. It would seem that profitability for the year would be a stretch at this point. I look for a lot of expense in bringing two products to market, and we are well into January without final approval yet, so sales are still a few days away<g>. It appears that we are on hold for our home run product, but profitability will take care of many of our current problems. As everyone here is well aware of, LGND needs money to develop its deep pipeline of science. Not completely different from knowing a gusher is waiting many feet below, and needing money and expertise to hit the oil. I hope you find Robinson up to the task of guiding the exploration. Though we may not always agree with his apparent means, I know few of us here could match the progress he has made towards the goal of profitability. Before we insinuate what he has planned with the warrant money(buy this or that), it might be more prudent to observe his actions. IMHO the highlight of what you reported is the androgen program! One out of the ball park in 2002-2003 would suit me fine! Again, thanks! Greg

To: medsunman who wrote (27375)	1/12/1999 5:39:00 PM
From: aknahow	Respond to of 32384

Eisingers comments on biotechs and H & Q are worth reading. H & Q 's talk of 1999 being a year for IPOS may have helped set the stage for a weaker biotech market. I would love to see TSC host industry conferences. I am tired of the investment banker "recomendations" and conferences sponsored by them. When Bear Stearns, a firm I think of very favorably recommends LGND, which I own, (some of), I discount anything they say because LGND is a client. Of course I read whatever is said and yes I hope it is true, but I know I can't accept it at face value. I would also love to see conferences independent of the "bankers." thestreet.com

To: medsunman who wrote (27375)	1/12/1999 6:58:00 PM
From: B.D.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32384

Thanks medsunman for the H&Q report. You mentioned that, regarding the Phase II trials, Robinson told you that "the Phase II's are complete and the data is being analyzed." Pardon my complete ignorance of biomedical research methodologies, but in a day and age where one can go out and buy a 450 mHz computer with 64MB of RAM and umpteen gig of storage for about one grand, how long does it take to "analyze data" before one either knows one "has it" or one "doesn't"?