Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

PSalerno  

View PSalerno's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    5 weeks passed after this article and we saw a positive price action with a a marginal new high, but not a significant shortcovering and not the $40 price target predicted here. EXAS stock price is difficult to predict, but this slow uptrend is in line with my exposure based on long stock and short put. I did not bet on a big upside, but more on the solid support near the recent low at $20 where I went long.
    Jul 2, 2015. 04:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    The numbers I was looking for are the test: 21,000 for Q2 and 32,000 for Q3. Not great but good. Probably the goal of 1 Million test for 2016 will not be achieved if there is no acceleration in this trend. Anyway even with 4-500,000 test the stock price should be well supported above $20-24.
    Jun 29, 2015. 09:28 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What Would Amazon.com Without AWS Look Like? [View article]
    Yes, I do not see any reason why Bezos should spin off AWS. Spin off make sense when the stock is undervalued. Here separating AWS will make more difficult to hide problems.
    Jun 25, 2015. 09:20 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    Short positions are pretty much stable. In the last year they run from 26 to 30 M shares notwithstanding the huge movements of the stock. So shortcovering is not a big factor in EXAS and this time could be the same story. The stock can move quite strongly without a significant chaging in the short positions.
    Jun 23, 2015. 09:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    Agreed, before the lung test news I was planning to sell after a breakout above 30, but that news can support stock price not just in the short run, as it can improve fundamentals, in a sensible way. Even added some short put position during the recent drop below 26.
    Jun 22, 2015. 03:14 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    Colonscopy already reduced mortality quite a lot for CRC, but the number of people screened is not growing since 5 years ago or so. Progress were made before. Now Cologuard is an improvement, but we still don 't know many things, including the compliance rate which appears to be 70%, quite good, but the numbers are still small.
    FIT underperforms Cologuard, but if done every years, on average FIT has the same mortality reduction as Cologuard every 3 years at lower cost. So uninsured or partially insured people may still prefer FIT, may be evry 2 years or every year saving quite some money.
    Jun 9, 2015. 01:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    11 millions including the under 65, in Italy there are almost 2 million FIT tests.
    I would like to know how many are the over 65 doing FIT test, may be 4-5 millions ?
    Jun 9, 2015. 01:11 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    I would do the same, for me the best solution is a colonscopy around 50-55, but with really good attention, and then cologuard every 3 years. There is also an high percentile of patients that even when positive at FIT do not want to do a colonscopy, in this case the screening is totally useless. Same could happen with cologuard. If it is positive and you do not undergo a colonscopy it is totally useless.

    10 years interval can detect about 3 cancers every 4, but with cologuard there is the same problem, you will not detect all cancers. There are also cancers who develop quickly.
    Jun 9, 2015. 11:31 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    Colonscopy every 10 years is not perfect, it reduces mortality by 73%, but Cologuard every 3 years is worse because it reduces mortality by 60%. Read what Conroy said on Feb 24.
    Jun 9, 2015. 10:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    There is a difference between theoretical TAM and what is really achievable. How many covered by CMS over 65 are doing FIT tests now ? How fast will be the transition to Cologuard ?
    Jun 9, 2015. 10:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    I do not post for you, it is your due diligence to read the CC on February 24th 2015
    Jun 9, 2015. 10:25 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    It depends on the individual preferences of the patients. If they are unwilling to do a colonscopy and prefer Cologuard, it is their choice, but as stated by Conroy, it is on average safer a colonscopy every 10 years than Cologuard every 3 years.
    Personally I would prefer to do Cologuard before a colonscopy, but I am a below average risk for CRC.
    Jun 8, 2015. 11:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    I said precisely what you said now that Cologuard is a substitute to FIT. Do not understand your point.
    Cologuard will take small market share from colonscopy, because many doing colonscopy are above average risk, and the rest are already doing colonscopy and some may not find that so horrible, if done with anesthesia.
    Conroy admitted that doind colonscopy every 10 years reduce the mortality by 73%, and doing Cologuard every 3 years reduce mortality by 60%. So colonscopy is better . Cologuard should be made every year to get the same reduction as colonscopy in 10 years. 1 year versus 10 years = same result. Insurance will pay cologuard only 1 time in 3 years, this is the problem.
    All this data about mortality are admitted by Conroy, everyone can read the CC.
    Jun 8, 2015. 10:21 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    You are both wrong. Cologuard is an alternative to FIT not to colonscopy in most cases. And FIT has the ick factor too, better than colonscopy, only blood test when available will be without major problems, but when any test is positive, the only thing to do is a colonscopy.
    Jun 8, 2015. 07:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Short Squeeze Imminent In Exact Sciences Shares [View article]
    You are not accusing me of disinformation, but Conroy. This is what he said in the CC during ER. He is totally right. I did not say that Cologuard will not do well, on the contrary it will do, that's why I am long the share, but on a realistic basis, I do not believe in the fairy tales.
    Jun 8, 2015. 07:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
4,098 Comments
1,523 Likes