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 : Monsanto Co. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1503)	3/5/1999 5:35:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Respond to of 2539

Whatever the reason for today's 6%+ gain, technical breakout & short covering, celebrex scripts, merger rumor, MTC longs are long overdue for a great day.

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1503)	3/6/1999 3:41:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Respond to of 2539

Celebrex Alone Can't Cure Monsanto By Stacey L. Bradford SmartMoney Today March 5, 1999 A BLOCKBUSTER DRUG isn't what it used to be. Not too long ago, even the rumor of a billion dollar pill was enough to send a pharmaceutical firm's stock price soaring. And once that company won approval for the drug, investors were almost certain they had struck gold. Case in point: Pfizer's (PFE) Viagra. Times certainly have changed. Just take a look at Monsanto (MTC). After only seven weeks on the market, sales of its arthritis drug Celebrex have surpassed Viagra in generating a record number of daily prescriptions. And most of this happened before its marketing agreement with Pfizer kicked in. Experts now predict Celebrex is likely to generate $2 billion this year. It now holds 20% of the arthritis-pain market. And yet, Monsanto stock is still lurking in the shadows like a depressive without his Prozac. The stock still hasn't rebounded after its fall last October when Monsanto's proposed merger with American Home Products (AHP) was called off. The company's shares dropped from 50 3/8 down to 34. In August its shares reached as high as almost 64. But the failed merger isn't the only issue investors have on their minds. In the past year the company has leveraged its balance sheet with $8 billion of debt to buy seed and other agricultural-biotechnology companies. Also, a couple of promising new cardiovascular drugs were abandoned after clinical trials proved disappointing. These new drugs could have generated up to $750 million and ended the argument that Monsanto is just a one-drug company. Some investors may also be worried about Merck's (MRK) competing arthritis drug Vioxx stealing share from Celebrex once it hits the market next month. The good news is that analysts believe all of these uncertainties are already reflected in Monsanto's share price and that it's unlikely the stock will drop further from here. Keep in mind that since Celebrex hit the market in January, the company's shares have jumped 18%. This is consistent with Warner-Lambert's (WLA) performance after it first launched its blockbuster cholesterol drug Lipitor, says analyst Richard Stover of Arnhold & S. Bleichroeder. After four months of Lipitor sales, Warner-Lambert stock jumped 60%. In Monsanto's case, it may take more than $2 billion worth of Celebrex sales to boost its stock price further. Investors are waiting for positive news from the company's new-drug pipeline. Monsanto is now pinning its hopes on second-generation Cox II inhibitors, the same class of drugs as Celebrex. Investors are also waiting to see how long it will take Monsanto to cut costs. Donald Carson of J.P. Morgan Securities says he expects to see progress in 1999 and for earnings to pick up in 2000. He points out that Monsanto is significantly downsizing its administrative staff; eliminating a number of ancillary corporate initiatives, such as R&D into what is known as nutraceutical/functional food; and is selling off noncore businesses. Finally, if the rumor that Monsanto and DuPont (DD) are planning on merging either proves false or peters out, some investors would also be pleased. "This is a depressant on the stock," Stover says. "If you bought Monsanto for the upside Celebrex can give you, a transaction with DuPont would bury the upside." The sad truth is, Monsanto shares aren't likely to revisit their August highs anytime soon. But new investors face little downside risk. Celebrex sales are soaring and eventually the company's agricultural business will be a power to be reckoned with. Monsanto stock could trade back in the 50 to 60 range over the next year. smartmoney.com

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1503)	3/6/1999 4:59:00 PM
From: Anthony Wong	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2539

Designer foods sprout hope Mark Lowey, Calgary Herald Friday 5 March 1999 The tiny seeds that Mike Chappell cradles in a spoon may soon help people better digest their food or prevent blood clotting after surgery. They look like ordinary canola seeds -- Alberta's bright yellow crop that makes cooking oil and margarine. Except these seeds never existed in the natural world. They were created in the laboratory by SemBioSys Genetics Inc., a Calgary pioneer in the genetic engineering of oilseed plants like canola, corn, flax, soybean and sunflower. The goal is to produce a variety of proteins from the seeds, to make more nutritious foods, more effective medications and more appealing cosmetics. "We are genetically altering plants to produce products they don't normally produce," said Chappell, a chemical engineer at SemBioSys's pilot plant in northeast Calgary. The five-year-old company, which has attracted a $17-million investment from agro-sciences giant DowElanco, is on the threshold of commercial manufacture, said Maurice Moloney, chief scientific officer for SemBioSys and chair of plant biotechnology at the University of Calgary. "We hope to be supplying things to people in the not-too-distant future." But biotechnology comes under scrutiny today at the country's first citizens' conference on food biotechnology. "Designer Genes at the Dinner Table," a three-day conference at the University of Calgary, brings together not only industry experts and government regulators, but some of biotech's fiercest critics. For the first time, a 15-member citizens' panel selected from 350 applicants from across Western Canada will "cross-examine" the experts, said conference director Edna Einsiedel, a U of C professor of communications studies. The panel will produce a written report by Sunday morning. It will be sent to federal and provincial ministers whose departments are responsible for regulating food biotechnology. Calgary mother Carole Parks, a member of the panel, said the public "not only pays the bills through their taxes for the development of some of this science, but also are the consumers." Biotechnology "is moving quickly, perhaps too quickly for comfort sometimes," said Parks, an administrative assistant in a medical genetics laboratory. Canola is the biggest genetically modified product that Canada exports and consumes, Einsiedel said. The Monsanto company's new potato, genetically altered to make it resistant to the destructive Colorado potato beetle, is already in stores in Eastern Canada and will soon head west. In Canada and the U.S., farmers now grow canola, soybean, corn and cotton that are genetically resistant to a variety of herbicides and insect pests. Biotech products designed for the dinner table, however, are giving some people "indigestion." Health Canada recently decided to not approve for use a genetically engineered hormone that, when fed to dairy cattle, boosts milk production but was blamed for causing infected udders. The hormone is allowed in the U.S. But in the United Kingdom, the citizenry recently rejected the notion of consuming genetically altered foods. Andrew Baum, president and chief executive officer of SemBioSys, believes opponents either don't understand or ignore the science underlying biotechnology. "I believe in the technology and the value that we're creating" through producing healthier foods and drugs that are easier to take, Baum said. SemBioSys grows its genetically modified canola in British Columbia -- hundreds of kilometres away Alberta crops so there is little chance for cross-pollination. "It's better to start out and just be very strict," explained bioscientist Moloney. "That gives us some time as well to do several years of field testing, to see if anything untoward crops up." calgaryherald.com