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: Henry Niman who wrote (28293)	2/21/1999 8:49:00 AM
From: Abuckatatime	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32384

I believe the sentence would have been less ambiguous if wording similar to that in bold had been included. <... the return of Targretin rights will now permit us, pending approval of Targretin for cancer, to rapidly generate revenues from distribution agreements pending in territories in which we will not directly market Targretin in oncology and dermatology...

To: Henry Niman who wrote (28293)	2/21/1999 7:29:00 PM
From: smh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32384

Professor Niman, Is there such a thing as a dumb question? When is a question satisfied? When the responder declares it so? << I think it's clear that many of the readers of this board still lack a clear understanding of the science and technology behind drug development. >> I assume.....(this).....was made in jest! Henry, I have read virtually all of your posts for more than a year. I have to say that legitimate and reasonably precise questions often do not elicit congruent answers from you. Like a politician, sometimes your answers actually fit a slightly different question than is asked. Furthermore, they often take the long way around the barn. Perhaps you could more effectively spread the Ligand gospel by addressing yourself to explanations that intellectually challenged lurkers such as myself can readily understand. I really don't think the more advanced threadsters will mind if you spell things out, at my level, rather repeating higher level renditions over and over. As to your recent posts in response to questions concerning the recent press release, I am sincerely sorry to say that I was appalled by your condescending attitude. It seems out of character, especially considering to whom it seemed to be addressed. This person sets, by example, the highest standard that this thread could ever hope to achieve and does not deserve the kind of treatment you have provided. In case you haven't noticed Henry, you seem to have a propensity to attract "distractors." As I still consider myself a Henry Niman "supporter," I hope you will consider the forgoing as constructive, FWIW. SMH