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 : XOMA. Bull or Bear? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: opalapril who wrote (9772)	5/3/1999 8:09:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

None of us know. MM keeps saying it's a buy, but no longer has it as as one of his best buys. Hardly individual trades and yet not clear which institution would be selling nor how stock would hold up under a desire to sell that volume. So, I am just as confused as everyone else, that is confused, is. However, this illustrates the problem I have with XOMA. We the shareholders have no idea of what is going on and this leaves us more vulnerable to being wip-sawed. Would we feel this way if we knew the required mortality number and total deaths to date. Or if we had received information on some of what was said at the various meetings held in March and April. Please vote against all management proposals.

To: opalapril who wrote (9772)	5/11/1999 8:01:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 17367

Opala, don't have the url but am pasting a great post. I agree with a lot of it except that I think Ed, has a point on the Gates factor. And of course I still support the move to Bermuda. Had expected CORR and SUGN to do the same by now. Disclosure I may be buying or selling. Posting this information is not an attempt to know the stock down. Why am I posting here? I think XOMA needs to see this so they understand how shareholders feel, in spite of XOMA's best efforts. +Edward Schnaper (681 ) From: +opalapril Tuesday, May 11 1999 5:58PM ET Reply # of 687 <<Xoma doesn't zoom and they may have an important product in the very near future>> Ahhh, Edward, you mention Xoma. Well, we can always hope. The differences between ICOS and XOMA are very instructive for anyone looking to invest in biotechs. Although I am long in both, comparison only serves to underscore why ICOS is such an impressive investment and Xoma is not much more than a wild gamble. • Xoma's management inspires faith in no one and has no past successes to point to. ICOS is headed by a certifiable hero of the biotech world. • Xoma's CEO, Castello, has paid himself an excessive salary ($500,000+) for years, regardless of the company's dismal performance. ICOS' Rathman is well compensated, too, but only because much of his compensation is dependent on company performance. • Xoma's cash level is so precarious that further shareholder dilution through another toxic convertible is unavoidable regardless of the results of an over-due P-3 trial results. ICOS, as mentioned earlier, is flush and, moreover, has a demonstrated ability to raise more whenever the need should arise on terms which are not unfavorable to existing shareholders . • No mutual or investment fund of any consequence has or wants a piece of Xoma. I'm not sure about a recent post's claim that 100 funds own a piece of ICOS, but I know scores of them do have substantial investments in the company. • Where ICOS enjoys significant insider ownership, Xoma board members and executives historically have invested next to nothing of their own money in the company. • ICOS corporate governance in Seattle has followed a steady and unremarkable path. Xoma had an occult, sudden lurch last winter that led the board to call an “emergency” meeting and abruptly move corporation headquarters to Bermuda -- for reasons which I am not satisfied have been fully or truthfully disclosed. • ICOS has made a superb effort to fully inform investors of present and future plans. As you well know, Edward, Xoma deliberately deceived its own shareholders about certain key aspects of the ongoing Neuprex trial. When called on it by our friends on the SI Xoma board, the company lied again and claimed the FDA made them do it (a dodge which is merely another lie). • Xoma went fishing two years ago for a large pharmaceutical partner and came up with nothing but old boots, then quietly dropped mention of the subject from its investors' FAQ. ICOS is sought after by many pharmaceuticals, but Rathman has spurned them all -- for good reason -- and said so. • Xoma's drug development pipeline is very narrow -- essentially, a roll of the dice on one recombinant molecule -– and any eventual commercial applications remain something of a cypher, one suspects, even to the company. ICOS, as mentioned, has undertaken a diverse and exiting range of projects, each with manifestly immediate and impressive commercial prospects . One last point: Xoma investors like you and me talk a lot about “the science.” But for all of the above reasons, I have grown concerned that Xoma is already suffering a serious degradation in the quality of its science staff. After all, to which would some brilliant biotech scientist with a terrific idea in her head prefer to hitch her wagon? To a well-financed research company with a wide, broad-based pipeline like that of ICOS? Or to a two-time loser like Xoma that has of necessity narrowed its commitment to a single compound in hopes it has multiple applications because if it doesn't the company will fail and everybody will lose their jobs? Needless to say, side-by-side comparison of an investment portfolio with the two stocks in them reflects these differences. In only 18 months, ICOS has risen from $13 to $43. Xoma has fallen from $5 to $3. While I admit the race isn't over until the last horse crosses the finish line, ICOS looks like a real winner; Xoma is starting to resemble a hammer-head nag. If you have read this far and still have not voted against management on all proposals do so now, please!

To: opalapril who wrote (9772)	5/28/1999 4:19:00 PM
From: aknahow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17367

opalapril, where are you? Don't forget your promise! How can you not post? Used to hate salespeople that would say, "The train is leaving." But XOMA the most disliked, least respected biotech in the world, seems to be getting up a head of steam. In my mind at this moment I can picture, Gare St.-Lazare, by Claude Monet painted in 1877. Suggest one of the BPI drugs be called Lazare. Drop the St. so as not to offend anyone, except perhaps the true believers. Not in XOMA, but in the Saint. Choo! Choo! Chug! Chug! Probably St. Robert will write a book about XOMA and call it, "The Little Engine That Could."