Theratechnologies Inc T.TH

RE:RE:RE:Contrarian opinion!!!

[Wino115]

SPCEO1 wrote: Here is a quick update on the analysts covering the stock:


Canaccord's numbers were the worst. Maybe the reason we have not yet seen a report from Ed is he is trying to figure out how to make the adjustments as inconspicuously as possible.

On the whole NASH partnership thing, I have to believe a lot of what Paul said on the conference call about it was normal, pre-negotiations posturing. I don't think they have a real strong hand in these negotiations but I also do not think it is as weak as your comments seem to suggest. 

And I think the biggest point from this quarter is that cancer is on track and that Marsolais effectively said they have seen some efficacy but need a few months to confirm it. By the time a NASH partnership is signed, it may be a complete afterthought. 

qwerty22 wrote:

I finally listened to the call.

"The Company does not have the means of its ambitions on General Nash"

I would say none of the assets quite match Paul's ambitions. That's not to say the assets are terrible but Paul's ambitions seem sky high. He's talking about building a structure to match Pharma, on Pharma principles and practices, sky high. The assets need to do a lot of catching up to that.

On NASH it's more simple than that. The window has temporarily closed on a go-it-alone program. We can argue how long it's been closing and why if we want, or not, it doesn't matter. The window has opened on partnership talks, everything they have done fits nicely with that. One of the Cheeto-munchers said he liked the partnership approach, I'm reading into that he hated the go-it-alone. That's progress if you care what Cheeto-munchers think.

I like Christain said it's still 3-4 weeks to move up a dose so things still on track. No hints of weakness in oncology.

Still wait-and-see or don't.

Curious what SPCEO thinks on getting analysts to reset sales expectations. Nice Paul brought in that research on Genotyping being down 25% during lockdown, but I think he did that to explain a temporary lull in sales. He was asked a direct question on unit sales in the coming quarters and squarely said we are focused on growth. I'm not sure how all that ends up playing out in analysts estimates.

 

palinc2000 wrote:

 

Assumptions
1- The total cost of the Phase 3 trial being over 100 millions$ and maybe more could have been financed by outstanding results in the oncology platform
2- The Company's confidence in the Oncology platform is unknown ...... talking about potential to cure all does not equate to high confidence in the results
3- So waiting for outstanding results in Oncology to raise funds for a very ecpensive Nash Trial could be the best outcome if the  oncology clinical redults are a breakthrough BUT what if the results
turn out to be way below expectations then the Company would be faced with an almost unsurmountable problem
4-So suggesting that the company has prioritized Oncology and ditched Nash is flawed imo
The Company does not have the means of its ambitions on General Nash and even without oncology the decision to partner would probably have been the same

A good CFO would have identified that a long time ago