nova

These Small Cap Cancer Drugmakers Have Big Growth Potential

Finally, ONTY's partner is Merck KGaA (a German company) instead of American Merck (MRK). There are no connections at all.

Merck KGaA is IMCL's partner (now LLY) for Erbitux.

These Small Cap Cancer Drugmakers Have Big Growth Potential

Hall wrote: "Below are the survival rates, by stage, for NSCLC.

> Stage I: 56%
> Stage 2: 34%
> Stage 3: 10%
> Stage 4: 2%"

This part does not make any sense. Early or later, we all will be dead.

Are you talking about PFS or OS?
What is the time-interval? Is it 1-yr overall surviving or what?

Pharmaceutical Dollar Rationing by Results

"The study’s authors cite an average survival increase of 1.2 months for Eli Lilly (LLY) and Bristol-Myers Squibb’s (BMY) Erbitux, costing $80,000 for a course of treatment."

This statement is a total lie. Why? Let us examine the facts:
* Erbitux, added to radiation therapy in head & neck patients, increases patients overall survival (OS) by more than 25 months (it is over 2 years). For this indication, Erbitux has also been approved in England.
* In metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) w-Kras patients, Erbitux + chemo increases OS by ~5 months. Furthermore, good many mCRC patients (~20%+), thanks to Erbitux, are able to have a curative surgery and become cancer free.
* In lung cancer, Erbitux+chemo increase OS by ~1.8 months.
* Finally, Erbitux overall course of treatment is less than $20,000 (max of 8 injections at $2,500 each).
Note: Erbitux sale in socialistic health care EU is about to reach 1.5B euro in a few years.

Now, one might ask a question: Why do these "scientists" lie?

Which Diabetes Drugs Will Win Out?

I agree there is nothing wrong with "me-too". So far, we have somewhat free-market system.

Consequently, drug companies must have freedom developing drugs they feel are appropriate. Some competition is good for everyone: companies and patients.

At the same time, in America, we have a major problem with the FDA:
- They are not either consistent or objective in the drug evaluation process and being too much influenced by "special" interests
- Very often, the FDA approves drugs without any clinical benefits to patients
- Finally, but not last, the FDA provide avenues for drugs comparative studies giving physicians and patients opportunities to make intelligent choices selecting the most appropriate drugs

In any case, the best marketing should not be a guidance for selecting the most appropriate treatment drug(s) for specific patients.

Biopharma: Instead of M&A, Think P&A

I see very few M@A going forward.

Yes indeed, big Pharma has cash but
- they do not have brains
- the present political environment in the USA is so uncertain, it is very difficult to plan ahead.

Consequently, any acquired company must have very specific & attractive features to be a target for the next 3-8 months.

Here Come Pharma's 'Me-Too' Mergers

The big Pharma lost its vision and ability to be innovative. Consequently, their preferences are to become 'pharmaceutical utilities'.

It offers large compensations to its executives but no any new outstanding or revolutionary drugs for patients.

9 Possible Pharma Deals for 2009

Last year, PFE got away IMCL with huge oncology potential.

The bottom line: PFE has no clue what they are doing.

Would a Lilly/Imclone Deal Make Sense?

Carl Icahn is the present ImClone Chairman of the Board. Consequently, his primary fiduciary responsibilities lie with ImClone shareholders.

I am a IMCL shareholder. I do not mind if Mr. Icahn drops his pants and runs naked along New York 5th avenue. However, I do mind about Icahn's performance as the IMCL Chairman.

So far, Carl did quite well:
- In less than two years, IMCL share price more than doubled.
- The old IMCL Board just looted the company treasure with huge undeserved compensations and bonuses. Carl has stopped it.
- New pipeline development clinical trials are well underway.

Some ImClone watching bystanders may be upset with Carl Icahn but, for ImClone shareholders like me, he did well so far.

PS
If Carl Icahn does not sell ImClone now to anybody and can double its share price again in the next two years, it is just fine with me.

Predictions on Imclone's Suitors

IMO, it will be PFE with a $70+ bid for IMCL.

Predictions on Imclone's Suitors

This is the second article by the same biotech-incompetent author.

Unfortunately, the author is incapable of understanding the ways to value biotechnology companies.

Diamonds and pearls are not valued by pounds and inches but rather by quality and beauty. The same is true for biotech.

The biotech value is in a company portfolio of drugs already available for sale including the presently approved and future indications, the value/potential of its pipeline in development and its patent portfolio.

These are the parameters potential buyer is looking at then they evaluate a potential biotech candidate rather than company's financials and/or its real-estate holdings.

This is a very difficult and complicated process. It is not a secret that the FDA evaluates drug candidates based on clinical trials results rather than on the Wall Street analysts or even the best scientists evaluations.

Back in 2001 then the FDA even refused to accept ImClone lead drug Erbitux for consideration, it appeared that ImClone has no value at all. Shortly from now, the same Erbitux being a bright oncology star is about to become a multi-billion dollar blockbuster drug helping thousands and thousands cancer patients all around world.

ImClone also has an outstanding pipeline of new drugs in developments. Some of these drugs are in the final Phase III development stage. A success of just one of these candidates will potentially double the present ImClone's value.

Consequently, a "secret" ImClone admirer has a lot of difficult work to do. There is no any need for either ImClone, its shareholders or a "secret" ImClone admirer to rush with the decision.

Disclosure: I am an ImClone shareholder. In my opinion, ImClone value is well above $8B.

Status Report: ImClone Systems - Bristol-Myers Squibb

I second to the author.

For the last 7 years, Bristol contributed very little if any to successful Erbitux development and/or marketing.

Now, Bristol discovered that
- its own share lost almost half of its market value in the last 12 months
- its pipeline is almost empty
- it spent a lot of money paying huge fines for not so legal activities

Consequently, Bristol has made a "brilliant" move by claiming its rights to something Bristol does not own and trying to by a highly successful biotechnology company for nothing.

Yes, indeed it was a "great" move by Bristol but it will not work.

Bristol-Meyers Squibb vs. Imclone: Icahn Stirs Up the Pot

Now, there is a new "genius" who knows what is good for ImClone shareholders and understands all legal aspects of Bristol/ImClone commercial agreements.

Merck KGaA, the other ImClone Erbitux marketing partner, also thought that they had rights to the second generation of EGVr-drugs. Unfortunately for them, the binding arbitration concluded that Merck KGaA has absolutely no rights/claims to 11F8.

At best, Bristol has very weak/marginal claims to ImClone's 11F8.

Furthermore, yes indeed, 11F8 falls under the scope of the commercial agreements since its is a competing to Erbitux drug. The same was true for Merck/ImClone agreement. However, it does not mean Bristol has any rights to 11F8.

Why? The Bristol/ImClone agreement is only for N. America (the USA and Canada), also known as "the Territory". The agreement "competing drugs" clause will expire in less than one week on Sep. 19, 2008. Until now, all 11F8 development activities were conducted in Europe or OUTSIDE the Bristol/ImClone commercial agreement Territory. Consequently, Bristol has no rights/claims to 11F8.

The same is true to ALL other Imclone pipeline candidates since all Bristol rights to them had expired 2 years ago. Note that Bristol does not make any claims to other ImClone drug candidates.

As for "the best" of ImClone shareholders, I can assure the author and him-alike that ImClone shareholders do not need Bristol $60-proposal.

ImClone is a highly successful and profitable biotechnology company with a lot of cash and outstanding new drug pipeline candidates. Success of any one out of 5 pipeline candidates presently in Phase II & III clinical trials, ImClone has all rights to, will propel ImClone market cap well above $10-12B in just 1 -2 years. Consequently, ImClone shareholders are ready to wait for a real payout day.

Presently, ImClone is highly undervalued by the Wall-Street. It should not be a surprise to anyone taking into account the Street latest poor performances when only the US Treasury and FED can keep major Wall-Street firms out of bankruptcies with endless money infusions.

As for the shareholders who think that Bristol's $60-offer is good, these shareholders had/have plenty of opportunities to sell ImClone shares at an open market well above $60 at any time.

Ownership of Erbitux Follow-On Is Central to ImClone Takeover

EP Vantage wrote: "Add to this the fact that the non-compete clause expires in a week today".

This statement is totally untrue. The non-competing clause of the commercial agreement has expired 2 (two) years ago.

Once again, EP Vantage should check the facts before publishing highly inaccurate article or may be it was done purposely.

As for the past ImClone statement that 11F8 falls under the commercial agreement, it is a correct statement since both Erbitux and 11E8 are EGFr-drugs.

However, it does not mean that Bristol has any rights to 11F8 since no 11F8 development activities took place prior to Sep. 19, 2008 in the Territory when the agreement competing product clause expires.

Ownership of Erbitux Follow-On Is Central to ImClone Takeover

The author of the above article has no idea of what he/she is talking about.

Apparently, the author either never read the commercial agreement between Bristol and ImClone or was unable to understand it.

There is another possibility: the author of this article has been paid for it either by Bristol or its agents.

Let us review the Bristol/ImClone commercial agreement.

The commercial agreement signed by ImClone and Bristol regarding to "competing EGFr-products" is very simple:
- First, the competing EGFr-drug commercialization agreement expires on Sep. 19, 2008. It is in less than one week from today. Consequently, Bristol had to stake its claims before this date even if these claims are highly questionable.

- Next. The commercial agreement, including competing EGFr-drug development and commercialization, is only valid in "the Territory" . The "Territory" is defined as N. America (the USA and Canada).

Up to now, all 11F8 development activities were conducted exclusively OUTSIDE the "Territory". Specifically, it has been done in Europe. Consequently, Bristol claims to 11F8 are very much baseless.

- Finally, even if Bristol can prevail in participating in a competing drug development and commercialization, accordingly to the commercial agreement, ImClone can Either offer to Bristol a 50/50 participation in the development Or diversify a competing product. In other words, ImClone can at-will deny Bristol participation in 11F8 activities by simple diversifying it [selling 11F8 to any third party it chooses without any proceeds going to Bristol].

Conclusion
1. Bristol claims to 11F8 are at best very weak.

2. At this junction, ImClone does not have to be sold to anybody, specifically at prices that are totally unacceptable to the majority of its shareholders. Presently, ImClone is a highly profitable company with large cash reserves and highly promising pipeline.

3. Presently, ImClone relatively low market cap reflects inability of the Wall Street properly appreciate ImClone's real value. It is not a surprise looking at the majority of the Street investment houses whose investment decisions were/are so poor that only the US Treasury and the FED are capable of temporary keeping them out bankruptcies with extraordinary cash infusions.

ImClone's Icahn Is Holding a Pistol to Bristol

I said it many times on this board:
- There is no any need to sell IMCL now for under $90. A merger, at this junction, can only benefit BMY and the Street that urgently needs M&A business
- Bristol was a loser and is a loser. It can take its bid and never come back
- IMCL does not need BMY. BMY can sell its IMCL stake and/or its Erbitux rights tomorrow
- As for the Street evaluation of IMCL and its potential, these crooks are staying out of bankruptcy ONLY with the Treasury and the FED endless money infusion. Does anybody in his/her sound mind need their advice?
- If Carl screws IMCL shareholders, he has a good chance to join Sam Waksal in a jail cell.