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 : T/FIF Portfolio -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (657)	3/4/1999 10:55:00 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1073

<. Validates INCY, MLNM, and GENXY> Both MLNM and INCY (Randy Scott) commented..."wont effect our efforts"... later in the article. Also near the end: "Those familiar with the consortium plan say a goal would be to level the playing field for gene-hunting biotech firms, large drug companies, and academic scientists..." [yea, that's the ticket, academic scientists too, yea] "The consortium would re-lease it's map into a public database. All the drug companies, biotech firms, and academic researchers would have free and equal access. The consortium would file intellectual-property claims on the public snips so biotech firms couldn't patent them and sell them back to the corporations". [.....] Thought this was interesting: "The idea here isn't to restrict the ability of biotech firms or anyone else to patent genes" "The idea is to make sure the underlying map we all need to find genes is available to anyone who wants to use it" [so, we want to keep an equal position for our snout at this nice new bigger trough, that these guys found, as we had at the old one. But trough's really should be public domain for heavens sake! Is that whats going on?] DAK

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (657)	3/4/1999 11:22:00 AM
From: RCMac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1073

>>anyone who has worked at a pharma will read [today's WSJ] article and chuckle. Pharma will be ready to compete, through a collaborative non-profit, when hell freezes over.<< Yup, isn't it nice. The article is grimly amusing. The reporters pretty clearly spoke in detail only to the big pharma companies and the alumni of the same companies who are trying to put together this SNP-mapping joint venture, and the article takes its slant from big pharma. But leaking through this journalistic filter is the fact that these companies have been talking for a year and aren't yet anywhere near signing an agreement, let alone "contract[ing] out the actual work" to academic and commercial labs, apparently through the typically slow grant-making process -- all this while Genset, INCY and MLNM are beavering away. But like DAK, I keep hoping this front-page WSJ article will give us another buying opportunity in INCY, something like the 30%-off sale we had for about 45 minutes on groundhog day, when I managed to scoop up a few shares (but not yet a full position). --RCM