Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

EnhydrisPECorp  

View EnhydrisPECorp's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Trevena Inc: Profitable To You And Disruptive To Everyone Else [View article]
    Earnings are worthless for stocks like this one. Just keep an eye on their cash levels and the rest is all about the data.
    Mar 17, 2015. 09:57 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Trevena Inc: Profitable To You And Disruptive To Everyone Else [View article]
    @ SR - also a nice piece! Good work!
    Mar 17, 2015. 11:37 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Trevena Inc: Profitable To You And Disruptive To Everyone Else [View article]
    SB-Fantastic article! I already own 1200 shares but want to buy more after reading this piece.
    Mar 17, 2015. 10:20 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Offers A Moderate Risk 80% Return On The Short Side [View article]
    Over an 80% drop in the last few days. Damn good call if I do say so myself.
    Oct 6, 2014. 11:26 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Johnson & Johnson Is Helping Me With My Coca Cola Investment [View article]
    JNJ underperformed? When factoring in dividends reinvestments, I have this stock being a better than average performer for at least the last 15 odd years. And management even states in their 10-K that they have beaten the DJI for 10 years running on an annualized basis. I guess if you look at short time periods like a year or so you can make this argument. But JNJ is a stock you buy for a lifetime and even multiple lifetimes by passing it on to your children.

    To drive this point home, an investor that bought JNJ in the 1980's and used a DRIP would be looking at close to a 5000% ROI! The DJI, by contrast, would have returned less than 1700% in the same time period. And JNJ would have also crushed KO over the same time period as well...just saying.

    Great stock that everyone should own, in my opinion. Growth outside of pharma is suspect, however.
    Aug 25, 2014. 02:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Enanta Pharmaceuticals Is Simply Too Cheap To Ignore [View article]
    See my comment above. It will be either by formulation (28.5%) or by therapeutic contribution. There might be more info out there on the specifics but I haven't come across it. The way it is worded in the SEC filings, it sounds like the royalty structure isn't set in stone yet.
    Aug 14, 2014. 04:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Enanta Pharmaceuticals Is Simply Too Cheap To Ignore [View article]
    Thanks for the stellar comments everyone! I really learned a lot by reading them.
    Aug 13, 2014. 02:45 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Enanta Pharmaceuticals Is Simply Too Cheap To Ignore [View article]
    Hi Barry,

    Thanks for the excellent comments! Here are my quick thoughts...

    1. While this therapy is supposed to compete directly with Sovaldi, it's important to remember that Sovaldi is an effective pan-genotypic treatment. My understanding is that AbbVie's therapy is indicated primarily for genotypes 1a/b.

    2. Your calculation of the second, less bullish, scenario is definitely important to consider. However, I haven't seen a press release where the two companies have agreed upon either royalty calculation. And the word "allocable" could mean a couple of different things and I wasn't sure how they were defining it quite frankly.

    Namely, they could define it based on formulation--most straightforward and this appears to be what you are referring to. By contrast, they could be defining it based on the protease inhibitor's contribution to the the overall therapeutic effect (perhaps hard to define but critical to consider).

    For example, Enanta's protease inhibitor is arguably the most important component of this therapy. In that case, Enanta would be doing a major disservice to its shareholders by agreeing to a deal that amounts to a paltry 5% of net sales. And if you consider the substantial premiums paid for Sovaldi and Idenix's experimental hep C drugs, I have a hard time believing Enanta would agree to such a deal.

    Based on the data I've seen for ABT-450, it looks like the star of the show. Glossing over some of the details, the clinical trial data would seem to indicate that ABT-450 is the main component, whereas ABT-267 and 333 act to make the drug more effective across a broader range of patient subtypes. And even then, that's not always the case.

    In short, ABT-450 looks like it does about 80-85% of the "work", but it's only 28.5% of the formulation by weight. Complicating matters, genotype 1b patients appear to respond better to treatment with simpler DAA regimens containing a protease inhibitor--giving Enanta all the more reason to argue for a royalty rate based on "effect" rather than "weight".

    Honestly, these are issues I'm still not clear on, but am glad you brought them up in the comments section. If you have a press release that sheds more light on the royalty structure, it would be greatly appreciated!

    I fully concede that I may be in error in how "allocable" is being defined in this deal, but the formulation scenario would make this the cheapest licensing deal for a next generation hep C drug to date. In that case, I am even more bullish on AbbVie. Food for thought.
    Aug 11, 2014. 09:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zeiher Study Likely Predicts The Outcome Of NeoStem's AMR-001 Trial [View article]
    Sort of surprised the market is so bearish on NBS. Nice article. I'll probably take a spec position in the near future.
    Mar 10, 2014. 01:11 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • IGI Laboratories: Management Has Delivered And The Pipeline Is Building [View article]
    Thanks for this article. Fundamentals are improving, management looks top notch, and a galaxy of ANDA's that give the company deep value.
    Mar 7, 2014. 05:44 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Forget The Sideshow Distractions And Focus On Galena's Pipeline [View article]
    This article contains multiple factual errors. First off, there are MULTIPLE lawsuits filed against GALE right NOW for this "insider selling nonsense" as you put it, with more on the way. That could close the company down given their cash position. Danger.

    Secondly, NeuVAX FAILED its clinical trials but GALE failed to alert shareholders to the truth. Read the peer-reviewed articles, or at least my summary. Stating otherwise is more misinformation. I gave the p-values proving this point. Where is your proof that it works? You only use what the company is stating, and I have clearly shown that to be a falsehood.

    You are dangerously misleading investors with your article that fails to cite primary sources, and is based on propaganda from GALE. They can't even be bothered to report correct statistics in their SEC filings, and you believe what they are saying for a single second?

    Finally, I caught Mr. Ahn red handed telling a fib to investors on SA, and cited the SEC filings to back up my assertion. If anything, investors need to be protected from his misinformation.

    Either cite primary literature backing your assertions, or state them as opinion.

    7 law firms do not believe Galena's story.
    Mar 4, 2014. 09:06 AM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • After Citron's Allegations, Is Questcor A Contrarian Buy? [View article]
    Stock is a buy here.
    Feb 28, 2014. 02:34 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena Biopharma: The Oncologist's Perspective On A Life Saving Therapy [View article]
    I said ICPT, and it was a tongue in cheek piece. Unknown bio working on liver disease. Aegis later named GALT the heir to ICPT. Again, totally random guess on their part. Point was, this is all tantamount to fumbling around in the dark. Sorry if my sarcasm was mistaken for sincerity.

    I generally only go truly long on sound companies like GILD, CELG, PFE, etc...small bios are a gamble.
    Feb 19, 2014. 10:57 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena Biopharma: The Oncologist's Perspective On A Life Saving Therapy [View article]
    interesting you say "facts" and "truth". scientists believe in neither. we don't accept a hypothesis, rather we try to reject it. big difference.
    Feb 19, 2014. 10:53 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Galena Biopharma: The Oncologist's Perspective On A Life Saving Therapy [View article]
    According to clinicaltrials.gov, your hospital is a clinical site for NeuVax. Perhaps I missed it but I don't see where you disclosed this important information. Conflict of interest?

    Are you directly involved in the NeuVax trial or oversee the researchers that are? That's important for investors to know.

    Just like I have to disclose that I'm short, you need to disclose if you are directly or indirectly involved in this research. Perhaps it's just coincidence. So, please clarify.
    Feb 19, 2014. 07:34 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
67 Comments
120 Likes