Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed


View Medhanie's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Amarin Must Be Acquired - And There Are Plenty of Potential Suitors [View article]
    It depends, but typically for a clinical stage biotech, I would say sell before the NDA is filed. No need to risk FDA rejection if you can; however, with Amarin the likelihood of approval is good. Therefore, Yes - waiting would be better. I'm not saying sell the company now. I just don't want to hear that the CEO is considering on marketing it alone. Selling the company is the best option.
    Jul 23, 2011. 12:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amarin Must Be Acquired - And There Are Plenty of Potential Suitors [View article]
    The biggest pharma in the world cannot exit the biggest pharmaceutical category in the world. I didn't see the statement, but that would be retarded. Keep in mind, I was also simply using Pfizer as an example. There are plenty of other potentials.
    Jul 22, 2011. 06:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amarin Must Be Acquired - And There Are Plenty of Potential Suitors [View article]
    You're welcome!
    Jul 22, 2011. 06:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 3 Small Cap Biotech Companies With Future Potential [View article]
    It's not HYPERACTIVE sexual desire disorder (HSDD). It is HYPOactive sexual desire disorder. Women with Hyperactive sexual desires don't need Libigel; they need a man (or men) with astonishing stamina.

    The problem with Libigel is that there are plenty of testosterone based creams, pill, or whatever else out there. None are labeled for women sexual dysfunction, but just about all are prescribed for it. Moreover, as we know from estrogen hormone therapy, there are many complications associated with hormone therapy that can make them very dangerous.

    I know Libigel has had some positive safety results in the phase II trial; however, phase II is not truly indicative of safety potential. Hence why, phase III is necessary. And if phase III provides good safety results, competition will be fierce. Testosterone is a common and easily applicable hormone that every one and their grandmother can market. Biosante's claim to fame is that their product is a gel - not a compelling competitive advantage.
    Jun 24, 2011. 06:10 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amarin: Market Seems to Be Anticipating Positive ANCHOR Trial Data [View article]
    Everything is likely happening in parallel. I'm sure offers have been put in. I know that just after the successful phase III trial results were released back in November of last year, the CEO said that he was bombarded with calls and interest for acquisition and/or partnership. Just after the anchor results were released last month, I saw the CEO in a CNBC interview in which he was very bullish about Amarin 101's market prospects. In the U.S. alone the potential number of customers is 40 million; worldwide it's 120 million. Given this, the market value of Amarin should be pretty good. Personally, I've done my own valuation and I won't sell until shares reach $35, which I believe is a conservative estimate. I believe a market cap of $5B is not far fetched.

    To see the full interview, follow the link below:
    May 10, 2011. 02:40 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amarin: Market Seems to Be Anticipating Positive ANCHOR Trial Data [View article]
    Part of the insider selling was already scheduled. However, a huge chunk of it wasn't. You also have to keep in mind that there will always be profit taking. The stock has gone up from less than a $1 to nearly $10 in a year. That's reason enough to sell. I do understand your concern; it's my concern as well. But the fundementals are still there. Amarin has already cleared Phase III; indications are good for it to clear the Anchor, and there is a huge market for it.

    In other words, it's still a good bet despite the sell off. Also, keep in mind that the principle behind Amrn101 is the same as Lovazza - in terms of both being purified forms of Omega 3. The difference is that Amrn101 is more purfied (Lovazza is at about 84% pure and Amrn101 is well above 90% pure) and able to treat patients with greater efficacy and lower side affects. Therefore, if the FDA approved Lovazza, I don't see why a similar product with greater efficacy and lower side affects wouldn't.
    Apr 16, 2011. 07:21 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Phase 3 Trials Fail: What Investors Need to Know [View article]
    point taken.
    Mar 8, 2011. 06:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Phase 3 Trials Fail: What Investors Need to Know [View article]
    Although I'm not one for unsubstantiated optimism, I think you're being a bit pessimistic. A 58% success rate is fairly significant. That's better than a coin flip. Moreover and as I'm sure you know, Phase I and II are conducted on a smaller number of participants. Therefore, results can be statistically skewed and provide an erroneous picture of a drug's potential. Hence why Phase III with a much larger participant number is necessary.

    Bottom line is that investing in a clinical stage company is the purest form of speculative investment. But it's not bad speculation. No one is betting that the housing market will crash and so puts a bet against it. I am long Amarin. After careful thought and consideration, I came to the conclusion that it's a good bet.

    You make a great point about biotech companies with novel approach or drug. Their failure rate is significantly higher. What this also means is that these firms skew the overall failure rate of clinical trials. If you were to extract those firms from the analysis, the success rate of companies that are developing more conventional drugs would be higher.

    The bigger concern for this type of speculative investment is the ability of the company to execute once approval is granted. Clinical stage biotechs are not always managed by the very best managers and they don't always have the best relationships with larger firms that can do the job.

    With all that said, biotech speculation is fun!
    Mar 8, 2011. 01:08 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is Netflix Overvalued? [View article]
    A thoughtful but overly optimistic analysis. First, I can't imagine 136 million subscribers. There are only 114 million households in the U.S. Even if you take into account foreign subscribers, your number remains very high. Second, as you say, the barriers to entry are very few for online streaming. Everyone and their grandmother - in particular Cable and telecommunication providers - will jump in with both feet. The competition will be much rougher than you give it credit. In ten years, Netflix will likely find itself at a competitive disadvantage to companies that own the telecommunication infrastructure. Thirds, the cost for its library acquisition will continue to go up. I don't see studios being kind with their content. Moreover, studio will favor retailer they have a relationship with (i.e. Time Warner will sell through TWC; Universal will sell through Cablevision and the PlayStation, etc.). Fourth, piracy will be an issue. Although I don't believe it will impact the movie business the same way it impacted the music business (at least domestically), it will cut into the industry's bottom line. I believe Netflix is severely overvalued. The expectations for medium term growth rates of 30 to 40% CAGR are absurd. I would not short this stock right now because there remains an irrational bubble with it, but I would buy some puts on it.
    Dec 8, 2010. 11:16 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Citi Is a Study in Lemming Investing [View article]
    Elvis - you rock.

    Citi is an interesting company in that it will not fail (the government will not allow it to fail). I agree that government ownership of the stock has had a negative impact on it's trading value. Given that the gov owns so much of it (I believe it is 22%), the fear is that Citi may be a casualty of politics. Therefore, no one who has a long term horizon would want to get in. Ironically, the gov saying that it will hold it until it's able to sell at (at least) buying price may hold Citi back from seeing a real growth in its stock price. There are a few fundamental bottom lines with Citi: First, it will NOT fail (so your investment is essentially guaranteed by the credit of the U.S. gov); second, the book value of equity is higher than the market value; third, it still has a very strong operation across the globe; fourth, it's balance sheets are not as bad as many think it is (it's actually improving and the gov has forced a lot of transparency); fifth, I expect (and the CEO has said this) that Citi will likely break up into two or maybe three separate companies; finally, it's Citigroup. As evil, corrupt, and completely negligent it was over the last twenty years, this is a company loaded with people who are really good at making money. The only other firm that's in the same league as Citi in terms of just being a pure cash machine is Goldman.

    Longing Citi is a good investment. More importantly, given that Citi's fortune are so closely tied to the larger economy, if we see real economic growth (between 3 to 5%), Citi will benefit greatly. Remember that as crappy as our economy has been, GDP did grow. As a consequence of that growth, Citi (and other banks of similar scale) made out like a bandit.

    I think MBSs, CDOs or CDSs that brought down our economy are not as much a threat because we now widely know what they are, how they operate, and who is exposed to them.

    Citi (in my book) is a good buy.
    Jul 6, 2010. 12:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment