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 : SIBIA Neurosciences (SIBI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (319)	4/14/1999 11:54:00 AM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 579

Anybody else place a trade this morning? I sometimes, when I feel that the relevance of news will be show to percolate for some thinly traded issues, break up orders so that it will not look like there is any sudden demand. This morning, I placed three orders for SIBI at 1K shares each. The bid ask was something like 4 1/2 by 4 7/8 when I started (not sure of the exact numbers). I placed order #1 for 1K shares at 8:59 a.m., #2 for 1K shares at 9:29 a.m., and #3 for 1K shares at 9:31 a.m. All three were limit orders, no other restrictions, at 4 7/8. #1 filled 500 shares at 9:37, 100 shares at 9:41, 100 shares at 9:43, and 300 shares at 9:54. #2 filled 500 shares at 9:39 and 500 shares at 9:54. #3 filled 500 shares at 9:34 and 500 shares at 9:54. The bid shown at Schwab was raised to reflect my bid prior to the open, but was 4 3/4 or lower from about 9:25 on. During the period from open until the last trade filled, I never saw the bid higher than 4 3/4. I don't mind this sort of manipulation, as it allowed my orders to fill. However..... (1) why??..... what is the advantage to the market maker? and (2) should I forward this post to the SEC?

To: LLCF who wrote (319)	4/14/1999 12:38:00 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	Respond to of 579

Transcription-Based Assay: SmithKline Beecham Bristol-Myers Squibb Eli Lilly Novartis Aurora Biosciences Neurocrine Biosciences Merck? Fluorescence-Based Ion Assay: Eli Lilly Novartis Aurora Merck? Phage display: Glaxo/Affymax Aurora sublicensed at least one technology to Merck, and I'm not certain of which (if not both) it was. from a SIBI press release, dated 2/1/99...... On December 18, 1998, after a 7-week jury trial, SIBIA received a unanimous verdict finding that Cadus directly infringed claims in the '629 patent through Cadus' internal activities and through its collaborations with Bristol-Myers Squibb and SmithKline Beecham.