RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Timeline???I found this article entitled ...
GILEAD’s POSSIBLE STRATEGIES IN NASH ... and thought that if TH was not mentioned in the article that this would be a good rebuttal to SPCEO's "outlandish speculations" that I accused him of. Well, imagine my surprise ... my pleasant surprise ... when I saw that TH was included on the list. It was written in October, so it is current but a lot has happened with TH since then.
So ... I have to admit, based on the articles below ... that it is quite reasonable to speculate that GILD knows about TH.
Here's the link ... search for
TESAMORELIN ... https://www.nashbiotechs.com/nash-biotech-analysis/point-of-view/gileads-possibles-strategie.html -LT
longterm56 wrote: Of course there is speculation in the markets, and I'm open to speculation or I wouldn't own TH.
Here are a couple links that demonstrate GILD is hot on NASH, but there are lots of pharmas out there for them to get friendly with ...
https://www.goinpharma.com/en/gilead-increases-activities-in-nash-sector-deal-with-korea-based-yuhan-reached/ https://www.goinpharma.com/en/gilead-signs-two-cooperation-agreements-for-nash-and-immunotherapies-over-two-days/ I have no idea if TH is on their radar, and I'd like to know how you know this ... that's all.
-LT
SPCEO1 wrote: I agree that it is speculation. It will be speculation until the NASH results are out and until GILD makes an offer that we actually hear about. Are you suggesting that we should not consider such things until they become reality? That would really slow down the investment world in a big way if one no longer tried to put together the pieces of the puzzle that every investment opportunity comes with! The bigger the opportunity, the more valuable it is to try to put the puzzle together and NASH is a very big potential opportunity.
But I don't agree that it is the sort of speculation that Longterm56 talked about happening on other boards. Nor do I agree that you can not present a case against it. Take the points that I have made supporting my case and give your contrary opinion to those points. It is that simple. And it would make for a good debate that would help inform all here on this board. If you make some great points, I will be the first to acknowledge them. I believe I have made some convincing points that make logical sense. But you might be able to highlight something I have never thought about. Thus far, however, I have put forth assertions to justify my case and you have just made general complaints about it.
I might add that the Seeking Alpha author also made the same suggestion about GILD's potential interest in TH if the NASH data is positive. That too is specualtion but it is informed speculation. And I don't think anyone making that claim is taking some huge leap of faith because if GILD wasn't interested that would be really weird given the direction GILD is taking in NASH (I should have also mentioned that many doubt that GILD's current NASH drugs are going to get good trial results, thereby potentially increasing the need for something else in this space) and its historic dominance in the HIV space generally. I mean, it really is pretty obvious that they would be interested. But we, and GILD, need to see the data before anything is going to happen. And there is certainly a chance that the data is not good enough and we can immediately drop the whole discussion.
Furthermore, I don't even want it to happen. I actually think it would be a bad thing if GILD made an offer for TH and would likely cost me and my clients a lot of money in the long term. I have no interest in transfering the potentially significant benefit from NASH to them for a too low price that is nonetheless higher than the current market price (and which would sadly get many investors with a shorter term focus to hand over their shares to GILD).
Another point - when we get the actual data and if it is good, should we not talk about the GILD buyout possibility at that point. At what point is it OK to start talikng about something like this? When Trogarzo was acquired, should we have just ignored its sales potential and potential earnings impact on TH until sales had been ongoing for a year or more? Even if you think that might be a better way of going about things, that is not how markets work. Whether you like it or not, some degree of speculation is always going on for all investments that are publically traded. Every analyst is specualting about the future when they make their earnings estimates. It is just what we do and we know as we do it that we are not going to get it exactly right. It is an iterative process that eventually leads to the actual outcome.
longterm56 wrote: Yea ... that's a more polite way of saying it ;)
-LT
PoorOpinion wrote: Congratulations, you've worked out there is a degree of speculation going on here.
longterm56 wrote: SPCEO1 wrote: Because, if the author is correct, the idea that GILD would be interested in acquiring TH would be almost impossible to refute.
Exactly where does this idea (GILD being interested in acquiring TH) originate? Oh ... you made it up! How can I refute a fantasy other thn asking you where it came from?
And how can you substantiate this ...
SPCEO1 wrote:
I am sure they know something about all the companies in the HIV space. I have to think they were involved in bidding for Trogarzo because it is pretty easy to see how Taimed rejected the normal big pharma, royalty route to do a deal with TH where they could maintain more control over Trogarzo. If that is correct, they certainly know who TH is since they lost out to them and probably still can't figure out how that happened.
How can I refute "I am sure they know ..."?
Sorry, but I'm frustrated by all the positive new and negative performance ...
-LT