Seeking Alpha

Red Acre Investments

View as an RSS Feed
View Red Acre Investments' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is Now The Time To Buy Ironwood Pharmaceuticals? [View article]
    "Due to increased costs, the announced advertising campaign will likely further decrease the margins associated with sales of Linzess. At the same time, it also raises the question of whether the market potential is as large as what was originally believed."

    Your analysis of their marketing spend is dead wrong. IRWD has guided that while they are changing the marketing mix, the amount of spend on marketing is unchanged.

    Furthermore - Linzess is so far outpacing sales of Zelnorm in it's initial 2 years. After Zelnorm began TV ads, sales increased 3X over 12 - 18 months and were on track to be >$1B before it was pulled due to adverse effects.

    TV ads work for IBS-C and CIC and Zelnorm is the guiding example.
    Apr 15 09:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor's Quagmire: Despite Rally, Risk Still Exists [View article]
    $QCOR acquired for $5.6B http://yhoo.it/1g0fnOn
    Apr 7 07:12 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    Q4 data result - as we said. Sad day for GBM patients
    Dec 12 08:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ImmunoCellular's ICT-107 Phase II: Patience Will Pay Off [View article]
    The paragraph you should have paid attention to was the last one where we said that the 64th event had already happened :)
    Dec 12 08:48 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    correct they've guided to 6 - 8 weeks for db-lock and then 6 - 8 more weeks for top-line = 3 - 4 months total from 64th event to top-line results.

    Full data analysis is an ADDITIONAL 3-4 months after top-line
    Nov 16 08:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    This is verbatim from the company - so you're basically saying the company is incorrect. Go back and check the Q2 conference call transcript where they outline the timeline to top-line results.
    Nov 15 03:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    C'mon Joe, I'm not talking about the interim itself.
    IMUC changed their guidance about the expected interim back in Q4 2102 compared to the Nov 2012 update - all before the interim took place - clearly they have some insight into event rates - and Gengos' comment on the Q2 call indicates the same thing.

    Why is this even an issue? Feel free to disagree about whether or not the 64th event has taken place, but we're laying out our reasons for having that view.
    Nov 14 03:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    being bearish means we'd be taking profits early - not ever a problem. Being overly bullish on the other hand can lead to a good trade turning into a disaster - we try to avoid that at all costs.
    Nov 14 03:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    Lol "Curiously overzealous basher". You got the gist of what I'm saying.

    Just because I'm playing devil's advocate doesn't mean I'm a basher - If the intent was to bash IMUC the previous CEO did some things that could be called into question.

    The whole concept of people being "bashers" because they point out potentially negative issues in an investment thesis is a bit ridiculous.
    Nov 14 02:53 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    Risk reward is exactly why we're long - If the trial is successful the valuation of IMUC corrects upward - by a lot. We're modeling chance of success (meaning showing 9 month OS benefit) at about 25%. Chance of failure at 50% and a midway result (some benefit but not 9 months, or benefit only in subgroups) as the remaining 25%.
    Nov 14 02:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    Justreward,

    I hadn't read Larry's article until it was mentioned here - after reading it didn't seem worthwhile commenting upon it.

    As to the timing issue - read my comment above - the company has clearly show in the past that it updates guidances and gets more specific as time goes on.

    During the Q2 call here's what Gengos said in response to a question we asked about trial timing:

    "our plan right now is not to comment on the event rate. And therefore we think the material event for investors is the results of the trial, not the event rates.

    "So again, our our current plan just to be clear is, we are not going to comment about when we've hit the 64th event or where we are on the way to hit the 64th event. We are just planning on announcing results when they happen."

    He didn't say "We don't know the event rate" or "We won't know when the 64th event happens" - simply that the event rate is not something they will publicly comment upon.
    Nov 14 02:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    In 2001 they were saying enrollment complete by Q2 2012 and interim by end of 2012. Later they upped the size of the trial (more centers and more patients) which pushed out the interim analysis point - after this point thye did not give specific guidance on timing of the interim until the November update you cite says "early 2013" and their subsequent Q4 earning call said "sometime in Q2" which illustrates my point - as facts change they update their guidance.

    Similarly - during the Q1 2013 earnings release they were guiding to trial completion by end of 2013. They changed this guidance during the Q2 earnings release to Q4 2013 or Q1 2014. - Clearly they have some info on the event rate. If they did not know the rate of progression of events in the trial - how would they be able to get more specific as time went on?

    In our view it is probative to look at their guidance on timing. We can agree to disagree on this point. Ultimately exactly when it occurs only matters for options buyers.
    Nov 14 01:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    Joe, don't fixate on the lower bound. We use very simple models to assess the risk in binary events. The pipeline is basically worthless is the first product fails a major trial and that's how we model it. It gives us a very conservative estimate of the risk/reward.

    Upside of 4X is easily acheivable in the short term - 10X is a longer term view but it's not out of the question depending on the data. All a matter of time horizons.
    Nov 14 08:08 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    We haven't been only bearish - we've been realistic all along. We've covered IMUC for months now.

    Sorry but we're not cheerleaders who get the pom-poms out and only say bullish things. If the trial is successful our price target in $9+ - but that's a big "IF".
    Nov 14 07:48 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Do You Fake 7 Of 16 Five-Year Glioblastoma Survivors? [View article]
    1) The title is open to interpretation - Let's agree to disagree on what Joe meant.

    2) You've completely misunderstood our point in the weekly review - In our weekly review we were presenting our logic for the conclusion that the 64th event has likely already happened. Public companies are very careful in what they say especially in conference calls to avoid any potential appearance of misleading. Thus when the company still guides to Q4 as a possibility and still guides to 3-4 months from 64th event to top-line results - a logical conclusion is that the 64th event has already happened. There is no seed of doubt regarding management being planted there unless you did not read it properly.

    We're on record stating the Andrew Gengos has been quite down to earth and done a good job setting expectation with investors.
    Nov 14 07:45 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
489 Comments
333 Likes