RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Keep an eye on ATESpecialSits wrote: Poor - you honestly think that if they come in with good results consistent with the last trial which was a WOMAC decrease exceeding peer drugs and that increased as the trial went on and a lack of GI damage a partnership is not essentially guaranteed? You think big pharma will pass, or not have a competitive bidding process... You need to wait for a partnership for validation... You're hilarious. Gamechanging drug comes out with results that are gamechanging and you think they need validation through a partnership instead of results. Just miserable. What an complete joke of a post. You've had good posts, and honestly, I hold you to a higher standard. If retail investors aren't able to read though the results to figure out what gets financed in pharma it doesn't matter as instos will pickup the slack as at that point it is materially derisked. Pretty sure results are all that matter. You think we have good results and as a result can't partner? That is kind of ridiculous no? Disappointing post from you.
But most of that is true now, even without the trial result, the potential is there NOW. How much would you discount the risk of poor trial results?
What do you expect the post trial pop to be? If this stock doubles it's still peanuts. Even if it went up 200% to say 60cents per share the market cap would only be ~$100mil. I think that would still undervalue a "best in class"? You think the post trial pop will be 1000%? Seems unlikely but I expect the management are looking for those sorts of values for the fully developed drug.
The question isnt necessarily IF they get a partner, I agree with you they should. The question might be how much value they can unlock with that deal, thats what I'm worried about. Maybe there'll be a bidding war and it'll be great but I hate the continued sever undervaluation of the company and what it might do to a near-future deal. So more value will (or will not) be unlocked by a good (or not so good) deal.
I did say a "substantial increase" should follow the trial result. Look at the post I responded to, It was worrying about missing out. I think the trial pop, whatever size it is, wont be the last of it. It could be much higher post-trial and still be under-valued.
I guess I'm hugely greedy for this stock but expressed it in the most negative way possible ;) I am also aware I overly worry but feel more comfortable doing that.