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 : Sepracor-Looks very promising -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike McFarland who wrote (3088)	5/27/1999 7:55:00 PM
From: Bob Swift	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10280

Mike, The key here is whether consumers are going to pay up on improvement or not if the original drug is good enough to get by. The blockbuster are those ICE that replaces parents that have demonstrated (even if rare) serious side effect. The problem with assuming ICE will take over the higher end of the market is that no one really know if that will pan out and people overreacted by assuming it is a total loss when some doubt surfaces. My worst case suggest even if SEPR only takes the lower end of the market, it is more than justify the current price.

To: Mike McFarland who wrote (3088)	5/27/1999 8:00:00 PM
From: David Howe	Respond to of 10280

<< I'm sure this has been answered before, but I'm not going to go dig for it: Royalties end when the parent drug goes off patent-- is that just arbitrary--why would generic drugs replace SEPR's imroved version? >> Royalties don't end when the parent drug patent expires. They continue as long as the ICE is sold. Generics won't replace the ICE. Generics of the ICE can't be sold until the ICE patent expires (try 2012 as an example). Generics of the parent drug can only be sold once the parent's patent expires. At that point we will possibly see generics of the old drug competing against the new improved drug. Dave