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 : ICOS Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edscharp who wrote (699)	5/19/1999 1:00:00 AM
From: Lel H	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1139

Edward, I agree with you in that this Forbes article seems a bit excessive in its praise of Rathmann. However, your jabs at the other discussants here, and your claim to understand the mentality of motivations of others, is hyperbole in itself. I have reviewed the posts on this board since your first, and I would hardly consider the response to your Gates theory as "rebukes". On the contrary, many of the responses are as thoughtful as yours, with no more evidence to contradict your theory than you have to support it. I agree that ICOS's future is dependent not on its CEO, not on its Board, not on its technical indicators, but on its success in clinical trials. Any clinical failure may send it plummeting. I'm realistic - I expect failures, and many of them. I am particularly concerned about the MS data, which in light of the earlier trial I expect to be a bust, and I have doubts about the ability of ICOS to show benefit in a complex, hetereogeneous condition such as hemorrhagic shock. I hope for the best, but plan for the worst - my investment is hedged against drastic price declines. I can't speak for anyone else on this board - I would not presume to know what they are thinking - but for you to suggest that I am blind or misguided in my decision to invest in ICOS is insulting. I have tried to keep an even keel about ICOS (as should be evident from my posting activity on this board), and I am confident that I have made a wise decision. Sincerely, Lel

To: Edscharp who wrote (699)	5/19/1999 11:08:00 AM
From: Patricia Smith	Respond to of 1139

Edward, I appreciate your concern, since this stock is up over ten-fold in the past few years. However, it is impossible to say if it is now over-valued or not. Even when (if) they start making money, it will be impossible to measure for awhile. 71 is not old. My guess is that he has a lot of good years left. Even if Rathman drops dead today, he's surrounded himself with like-minded people; serious scientists who are determined to bring products to market. Leadership is important, but you know how organizations are. Either you fit in or you leave. There's no reason to think that Rathman's exit would change the course of ICOS, especially in the short run. Both Rathman and Gates could have hyped this stock into the hundreds by now, and they have not. They can't help what Forbes or others say. People might be buying this stock based on Gates & Rathman, but there are worse reasons to buy stock than management with strong histories of success. Holding, Pat

To: Edscharp who wrote (699)	5/20/1999 5:52:00 AM
From: Robert Scott	Respond to of 1139

For me it's as simple as this. If you can do something once, you can do it again. If you've been successful before, your chances are better than others (who haven't) of being successful again. You know how to do it - what it takes. Needless to say, this is very important. This "HYPE" has been around for 8 years building up products in the pipeline and making alliances with other drug companies. In truth, this looks like a very solid company and investment to me. The fact that the stock has run up of late is a recognition of the # of products in the mid-late stages of development. If it goes back to 35 so be it. I would be shocked if Rathmann hasn't put in place a succession plan as any good manager, especially one who is 70 years old, knows how important this is. In short, I like the company and do not understand why it is so important for you to slam it - a short perhaps?