Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Matt Berry  

View Matt Berry's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • A Look At Reliv' International [View article]
    Nice work Duane.
    Feb 27, 2015. 05:00 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Physician Survey Results On Lomitapide And Mipomersen Support Our Thesis [View article]
    How did LifeSci Advisors receive responses for the lomitapide survey? Mail, email, website, phone, or other?
    Jul 11, 2014. 12:47 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Isis: Long-Term Kynamro Adverse Events May Apply To Entire ISIS 2.0 Pipeline [View article]
    "AEGR's Eteplirsen" ?
    Jun 27, 2014. 07:49 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Theravance Just Given Away 40% Of Its Value? [View article]
    Might have gone down with momentum-bust in Bio-space, forcing ETFs to unload without discriminating between types and forcing managers to meet redemptions, creating reinforcing cycle: "baby out with the bathwater." This or that theory aside, for longs, its an opportunity to increase the bet.
    May 14, 2014. 03:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion Pharmaceuticals' Viability Threatened As Regulatory, Legal And Market Forces Close In [View article]
    "A blabbermouth CEO doesn't seem like a strong starting point for an investigation to me." AEGR IR has said that they believe the FDA and DOJ issues are separate -- so the problem is more than "blabber-mouthing". There is a reason for the DOJ investigation of promotion, marketing and sales practices. If AEGR is forced, by law or excessive scrutiny, to correct sales practices, expect revenue to be affected.

    AEGR is going to have a seriously difficult time justifying its $1.5 billion market cap with $100 to $200 million revenue, especially if revenue flattens out and shows no growth going forward.
    Mar 28, 2014. 07:12 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion Pharmaceuticals' Viability Threatened As Regulatory, Legal And Market Forces Close In [View article]
    "Doctors prescribe off-label all the time." Yes, but Pharma companies cannot promote off-label. It's is illegal. If AEGR's own scientists are correct that there are only 300 US HoFH patients, then AEGR management's attempt to get more than 300 could put AEGR at risk for off-label marketing.

    The FDA warning is not a light matter. Also, you didn't mention the DOJ. The Department of Justice investigation was initiated for a reason. That's not a light matter either. We can also expect that if the Brazilian investigation via their anti-corruption law yields evidence, then there is a threat that the SEC/DOJ might follow with action via the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
    Mar 28, 2014. 06:07 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion Pharmaceuticals' Viability Threatened As Regulatory, Legal And Market Forces Close In [View article]
    Both Bio Insights and LifeSci Advisors wrote on AEGR. They both received a mention in Rick Pearson's recent expose of paid shills on SA:

    Pearson: "My concerns with Bio Insights are as follows: First, he was identified to me as a paid writer by Tom Meyer. Second, he has written a large number of articles on Proactive/Dream Team clients. For example, he wrote on CytRx at the early part of that promotion in October. Third, there is a very obvious overlap between the articles of Bio Insights and Tech Guru and other identified paid writers. Fourth, the articles all appeared within the promotion window for these stocks and in fairly close proximity to the other authors from above."

    Pearson: "Tech Guru has also clearly indicated that he does paid writing for LifeSci Advisors. I am still assembling further findings on LifeSci."

    Pearson quoting Tech Guru: "its been my experience that when there are 2 firms on the same company they do very different things. for instance one firm like a mission IR for example would do promotional stuff- interviews, videos, syndication, whereas another one like Proactive or LifeSci Advisors to use those examples, would be the ones doing the seeking alpha articles, setting up road shows, and being more strategic in general. I work for the latter type of firms. I've never seen a case where there is direct overlap among firms doing the same thing, for the same client."

    Hopefully we'll learn more as time goes on. See
    Mar 28, 2014. 04:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    You don't defeat an argument by declaring how long it's lasted the test of time, but by providing new and conclusive information.

    Of course I'm short AEGR. I investigated it and, given the facts presented here, believe AEGR has mislead investors.
    Mar 25, 2014. 04:21 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    And I've responded to you.
    1. If you feel that the number in the scientific community is incorrect, you need to take this up with the scientists, not me. The number 300 is still used by scientists today. If it needs updating, why don't you contact them and have them subject their data and analyses to peer review?
    2. If the Nobel Prize winners and AEGR scientists are correct with 300, then a sales method and promotion toward a number greater than 300 puts AEGR at risk of off-label promotion. THE GREATER THE NUMBER, THE GREATER THE RISK.

    There is reason for the Department of Justice investigation of AEGR's marketing practices, what do you think that is?

    Mar 25, 2014. 04:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Behind The Scenes With Dream Team, CytRx And Galena [View article]
    Great work Rick.
    Mar 13, 2014. 04:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    The patient count of 300 was provided by the very scientists working on Aegerion's drug. That prevalence number was also used by Nobel prize winners. I had/have nothing to do with that estimate -- I'm following the facts.

    If the Nobel prize winners are correct with the number 300, and if AEGR is promoting the drug to 3,000 candidates, this could constitute an off-label risk and prompt serious regulatory scrutiny. And indeed the department of justice is investigating them: search AEGR news for the subpoena.
    Mar 1, 2014. 08:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    Agree. More scrutiny will certainly result in an adjustment to the current numbers, but there is no basis to believe that it will adjust by the 1,000% that AEGR is claiming.
    Nov 16, 2013. 06:31 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    Yeah, who is going to go on TV now?

    Also, there seems to be a regulatory shift here of some sorts. We'll just have to wait to see what is really happening behind the scenes at the FDA.
    Nov 16, 2013. 06:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    The "price target" was by Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. They have a history of conflicts of interests between analysts and investment banking.

    450 Fifth Street, N.W.
    Washington, D.C. 20549-0801,
    Plain tiff,
    -against -

    See SEC summary:

    See SEC complaint:

    Also, try and go through their "regulatory events" -- more insight into these "analysts" and their "research."
    Nov 16, 2013. 06:19 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Aegerion: Addressable Market At Odds By 1,000% [View article]
    >While the 187 doctors in Germany surveyed (out of 303,000 doctors in Germany) is an interesting data point, again, it is such a small sampling, that it isn't statistically meaningful.

    1. It is more meaningful as a study open to public scrutiny than a secret-study a company only claims to have. Too convenient for a company to promote, “We have the evidence, but we’re not going to show it to you.”
    2. 303,000 doctors in Germany: The study focused on doctors/clinics which treat HoFH. I wouldn’t expect podiatrists to be contacted, etc.

    >Similarly, the article did a literature search "A systematic literature search in EMBASE and Medline was performed in conjunction with a targeted manual search for epidemiological HoFH studies." which is hardly real world data. It was a search launched based on research papers published.

    You’ve presented only half of the aim. The literature search was done to compare with the empirical search. The very next sentence reads ….

    “Additionally, a nationwide survey was conducted in Germany in all identified apheresis- and lipid centers. The purpose of this survey was the validation of the systematic literature search results based on empirical (practice) data.”

    So here is your empirical search, paid for by AEGR and which estimates a prevalence of 1:860,000.

    Additionally, Dutch studies show a prevalence of 1:640,000 (and with founder effect involved).

    >While many short-sellers demand "Show me where it is published that the statistics are truly as high as you claim" it simply doesn't work that way.

    AEGR claims a prevalence rate, without showing their investors or the scientific community evidence to back it up. Now they stop quoting patient counts. Add to that the low revenue for last quarter, which if responsibly deconstructed suggests that there was no patient growth.

    >AEGR has a database of patients who have registered directly with them seeking treatment.

    AEGR can create a database. Patients on therapy is another thing. Now we have no means of verification for either of them -- and the low revenue for this last quarter points toward a ceiling on US patient growth.

    >These patients have health insurance that will pay for the treatment, and you'd better believe that those insurance companies are checking each and every diagnosis to be sure it is accurate and legitimate before paying that hefty fee.

    Here’s one that requires prospective Juxtapid patients to try the rival Kynamro BEFORE trying AEGR’s drug.

    “Homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HoFH) adjunct therapy. Approve if ALL of the following are met (a AND b AND c AND d AND e AND f AND g AND h):
    h. A documented prior trial and failure with mipomersen (Kynamro™)”
    Paramount Healthcare:

    >Since AEGR has already crossed the 300 patient watermark,

    Where did you get that number? Break down the revenue from last quarter and show me how you can calculate 250, let alone 300 patients on therapy without AEGR becoming a zero sum game by severely discounting the drug? “Acceleration” in patients on therapy is not mathematically possible for the last quarter if details given in CC are true. Do the math. At this rate, how will AEGR be able to justify its 2.5 billion market cap?

    >Similarly, the empirical evidence is how many patients are diagnosed with the disease, and then how many go on treatment. Since nobody is going to fund a research project to "prove" the old statistics were inaccurate, we wait and see how many are actually diagnosed and go on treatment.

    AEGR funded an empirical study in Germany and counted actual HoFH patients in practice. The prevalence rate was 1:860,000.
    Nov 16, 2013. 06:05 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment