Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View PeterScriabin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Amazon: A Major Move Means No Retailer Is Safe [View article]
    pat: Paulo didn't cost anyone a penny by posting facts and opinions about AMZN. Each of us investors gets all the credit (and all the debits) for our own investments. Do you send a portion of your stock gains to those who informed or advised you about those stocks? No? Then shut up about the losses.
    Dec 14, 2013. 06:47 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Celgene And The Chronic Disease Fund: The Next Domino To Fall? [View article]
    Mr F: Docs generally "choose" Acthar when the cheaper alternatives didn't work (IS - where Acthar is considered the standard of care - excepted). It is very often a last resort.

    I suspect you knew all that. If I am mistaken, then it seems you are certainly not shy to comment on things you don't know much about.
    Dec 11, 2013. 07:17 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor slips as Citron goes back on the offensive [View news story]
    zubbub: much like Citron's, your post is so chock-full of misleading statements and outright misinformation, it would take a full-length article to address them fully.

    As briefly as I can:

    .the synthetic ACTH study cited was versus the Ponticelli regimen (defined as methylprednisolone, etc.), and NOT Acthar or ACTH.
    . Questcor has stated numerous times that its mission is to test synthetic ACTH against Acthar; that it is in fact doing so; and that it has contracted very specifically to do so, with Novartis.

    Some food for thought for minds with Short attention spans: did you know synthetic ACTH was developed in the 1960s? Where are the worldwide sales since then, especially today? Why has Novartis been trying to offload the product since at least 2002? Why are under-capitalized stunts like Cerium Pharmaceuticals and Retrophin suddenly so interested in tetracosactrin - where US big pharma has in fact NEVER been? Could it be because of the success that Questcor has been making of Acthar (based on ACTH, which has itself largely fallen by the wayside outside the US).

    Did you know that synthetic ACTH is not approved for mainstream use in the US, and that is going to take an extremely well-capitalized effort over 4-6 years (or more) to bring even a handful of Acthar's on-label indications to market, never mind all 19 of them?

    If you were really concerned about patients, you might consider that Questcor is their best (perhaps their ONLY) realistic prospect of ever getting synthetic ACTH. And you can be sure (unless you too are a cretin), that all the capital that needs to be invested in synthetic ACTH will ultimately be reflected in the market price per vial - and that it won't be $10, or the price Retrophin mentioned either!
    Dec 5, 2013. 02:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor slips as Citron goes back on the offensive [View news story]
    oneother: lots of things you and I may see are not so easily seen when the observer is Short-sighted.
    Dec 5, 2013. 12:31 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor possibly hit by Acthar coverage worries [View news story]
    They might indeed be suffering that way, but Boston Medical Center HealthNet Plan's previous policy update was worded exactly the same way. See
    Dec 4, 2013. 05:27 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor slips as Citron goes back on the offensive [View news story]
    Regarding Citron's assertion that Acthar was substituted for synthetic ACTH, the page he cites clearly shows that these were 2 distinct studies! Can't he even tell the difference between 10 patients (1st study cited) and 32 (2nd study cited)? What a cretin. And people sell on this kind of basis?
    Dec 4, 2013. 02:46 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • May Pop On Earnings, Sell The News [View article]
    RW: last 4 non-GAAP earnings (.08, .13, .10, .09) sum to exactly $0.40. At a PPS of 57, I'm THRILLED to tell you that's a P/E of 142.5, not 50.
    Nov 18, 2013. 12:14 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • An Answer To 'Is Amazon A $500 Stock?' [View article]
    Paulo: just wanted to second 215's post 100% (actually I'd be about 94th-ing it, what with all the other similar posts and Likes).

    Noted your comment about health also not cooperating lately, and was quite sorry to hear that. Hope it is nothing serious, and also that there is no psycho-physical correlation with the AMZN events. You have put a lot of energy at all levels into this work, and many, many of us here greatly value it. But you should never go short your own health, so if that's the cause of your withdrawal, then so be it.

    The AMZN phenomenon would probably be better explained by someone versed in the irrational psychology of mass events and crowds, than by the normal economic and financial rubrics. As you and others have shown, the latter are unlikely to change much.

    When some in the crowd start to turn, and the selling begins, there will be quite a rush for the exits, somewhat like the moment when the child in the story pointed out the nakedness of the King. All this could also be glimpsed in the magnitude of the up-then-down of AAPL in the last couple years.

    AMZN is a false god, and it too will have its day and its dusk. But buying Puts is perhaps not the best solution because no one knows when.

    [Cue Spanish guitar, and camp fire...] Stay short, my friends.
    Oct 26, 2013. 12:03 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor And The Chronic Disease Fund: Is Free Drug Truly Free? [View article]
    Further to holycow's point about the somewhat fantastic last paragraph: according to the Barron's article, Questcor donated $3.1m to CDF for Q2 (ie. quarter ending June 2013). For that same quarter, non-GAAP revenues were ~ 196m. Assuming a range of 10-20% for copays, the CDF donations would then blow up into a range of $15.5m to $31m, ie. a range of roughly 8 to 16% of revenues. Not 50%!!

    Even assuming CDF's tax status were canceled, and its functions closed down (unlikely considering the number of other drugs and companies involved, with Questcor only a smallish player in the mix - but assume it), Questcor would always be free to set up a similar arrangement with another such charity. There would be plenty of time while the proceedings against CDF went on.
    Oct 23, 2013. 02:37 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Barron's questions relationship between Questcor, Chronic Disease Fund [View news story]
    The Barrons writer stated that WS short-sellers who tried to crash the CDF event showed him letters from Questcor (1) denying admission to the event (2) threatening legal action.

    One wonders just who these short-sellers might be? Hmm, pity SA felt it had to suppress Michael Fuller's writings, which bore mightily on that topic.

    Here's part of a comment on the Barrons article:

    "Looking at CDF website there are many well known drugs that they cover. H-P Achtar is one of over 70 drugs covered.

    The company has been the target of short sellers, and this article is another attempt to bring down the stock price.

    The mechanism of action of H-P Achtar is diff to those of steroids, so prednisone is a poor comparison. One of Achtar's mode of action is similar to that of prednisone but it acts through many other novel mechanisms which steroids do not. Furthermore, you have humiliated 1000s of doctors who prescribe Achtar: ie they don't know prednisone exists! Achtar is used after prednisone has failed! Then you have indirectly ridiculed the FDA:ie they approved the medication when steroids are an option! You're obviously hoping that readers of this article will be intellectually challenged and follow you through.......

    The entire article is suspect and I am ashamed to subscribe to Barrons. I had high regard for Barrons, despite misgivings of my colleagues. I will not give this article any more attention."
    Oct 21, 2013. 11:56 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dynavax: New Phase 3 Clinical Study Finalized For HEPLISAV [View article]
    Mr Cohen: thanks for your updates on DVAX, all of which I have studied since the accursed day in mid-2012 when I bought in.

    My understanding was that the Nov-2012 AdCom, and the FDA decision Feb-2013, were based on worries about possible side-effects, determination of whose causation would require sample sizes orders of magnitude larger than the present new spec.

    Please forgive a naive question: how can this new sample of only 8000 (of which only 5500 will get Heplisav) provide a statistically-significant basis for a new safety determination - even with aggregation of the previous sample data?

    The FDA, Dynavax and we, all know this is total, absolute, complete and utter hypocrisy. What am I missing?
    Oct 17, 2013. 01:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Good Entry Point For Manchester United Shares With Record Revenue And Conservative Guidance [View article]
    So with the cornucopia of new revenue, they amassed non-IFRS EPS of 0.11 GBP for the most recent fiscal year. At an exchange rate of 1.6, call it $0.17. With PPS around $17 that's only about 100 P/E. This stock is in the same kool-aid lake as CRM, LNKD, AMZN, etc.. At least they don't pay Rooney and Van Persie with stock, eh?

    In addition (I understand that) MANU just announced an increase in the shelf registration and an intention immediately to dilute the current float by about 15%, no doubt based on their perception of the current PPS.

    True, all the EPL clubs are getting a big revenue boost this year via the larger central broadcasting pot (ie. in addition to the commercial revenue factors to which you allude). Even so, I think anyone who went long MANU now, especially with all the uncertainties about the football side, would have to be motivated by considerations other than business.
    Sep 20, 2013. 02:59 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Huge Week Ahead For Apple [View article]
    No need for them to make accusations, simply refuse to assist persons who cannot show ID matching the registered owner of the serial number in the DB.

    The store could at least make a bona fide effort to contact said owner. I can't just stand by a parked car I fancy, and call a locksmith to force entry. I have to show evidence of ownership. Obviously, title apparatus becomes less economic as price of commodity falls, but isn't a smart-phone expensive enough to justify it? Bicycles, eg., have serial numbers and registered-owner DBs.

    Seems the fingerprints are going to have to be stored in the Cloud, or thieves will figure out a way to replace whatever part of the phone contains them. Apologies for my ignorance in writing all this, but I'm hoping someone who deeply understands the Authentec and FingerPrint Card tech - or just Apple's procedures when resetting phones for "customers" - will pass by and clear this up.
    Sep 8, 2013. 11:09 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Huge Week Ahead For Apple [View article]
    JYucca: that is a story very disturbing to consumers and investors alike. I think you should have taken it higher in the company. As described, the response you received is simply unacceptable. I don't suppose many receiptless thieves brazenly walk in to Apple stores to get functions unlocked, but even so...

    As an AAPL long, I plan to contact IR about your post. No idea how responsive they are to investors with less at stake than Icahn, Einhorn, etc. :).
    Sep 8, 2013. 10:32 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Huge Week Ahead For Apple [View article]
    Obviously would undermine a lot of the point if any thief can do a factory reset, so that surely won't be easily accomplished without the original fingers AND password(s).

    Why not just have the same menu option, that sets up the various fingerprint-locked functions, have a sub-option to remove the locks IF the same fingers (with temperature and whatever other biometric concomitants are used, ie. to prevent the freshly murdered body being used for this function) are supplied? This could be used if ownership is being transferred, phone is loaned etc..

    If the person to whom the iPhone is locked is no longer available (death, incarceration, etc.), perhaps you take the phone to an Apple retail outlet, along with the evidence, and they can do the reset? Just thinking aloud here...!
    Sep 8, 2013. 09:56 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment