FTSV acquisition by GILD

Forum rules
- Comments must be civil and on topic
- Back up claims with evidence/reasoning/sources (posting links is allowed)
- No commercials/harassment/spam
Post Reply
cheng_ho
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 11:27 pm

FTSV acquisition by GILD

Post by cheng_ho » Mon Mar 02, 2020 4:41 pm

Clearly, big pharma is interested in the MDS/AML market, they see it as large and effective therapy as attainable.

JNJ is invested in ARGX and Constellation, now GILD has bought out FSTV.

Any thoughts as to why no pharma has shown interest in Geron?

Zhears
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 12:19 pm

Re: FTSV acquisition by GILD

Post by Zhears » Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:55 am

Timing?

If they wait and see what the results are like in the current trial and the nature of what (hopefully) will be announced this month they would know more about what they are buying.

If it is a normal P3 then we have another year or two before this could be acquired.

Gwikley
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: FTSV acquisition by GILD

Post by Gwikley » Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:27 pm

Irrespective of the results, the drug, it's pathway is unique. Certainly would seem like an extreme bargain buy right now. 4 or 5 a share would probably do it.

karagozoglu12345
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:48 am

Re: FTSV acquisition by GILD

Post by karagozoglu12345 » Sun Mar 08, 2020 2:33 am

Bill , Thank you for posing an important question. I have wrestled with the same thought quite some time. The conclusion I reached is that experts funds and institutions consult with do not appear to recommend investing in Geron. I know for fact that funds and institutions do not invest millions of dollars without consulting with reputable experts. Dr. Ron Garren who ran Biotech Insight subscription Newsletter had often mentioned his regular consulting with funds. The question then is why do they not recommend investing in Geron. Following are my two cents: a) MOA was not the primary end point in MF study. It is a by product result and, consequently, may be interpreted as exploratory and not a prudent method following all standard conventions that FDA typically endorses. Granted Geron has done additional studies to be more persuasive but apparently these did not go far enough to remove the question mark. The fact that symptoms ( spleen size etc. ) have not improved while extending life is counterintuitive and
as such reinforces the question mark. If the "disease modifying" effect was carved-in-stone, shown by data to allow solid conclusions, I think we would have seen a significant fund and institutional investment flow as well as potential partners knocking on Geron's door. b) MDS study has a lag with Lusta, and by the time Imet is approved Lusta will be well established. It is a big challenge to establish new drugs as a viable alternative to existing drugs. PTLA and FLXN stories are cases in point even though the new drugs by these companies are significanly better than the existing alternatives. c) Geron does not have a wide enough clinical trial portfolio to balance investor risks. d) The trend is combo but Geron does not have a single combo trial.
Proven to be wrong is generally antithetical to human nature. I would love to be proven wrong simply because I have 550K paper losses. I would appreciate it if you challenge the four points I raised based on solid facts so I can have more of a peace of mind and hope that someday I may recover my loss at least by some percentage.

karagozoglu12345
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:48 am

Re: FTSV acquisition by GILD

Post by karagozoglu12345 » Sun Mar 08, 2020 5:48 pm

Correction: MOS not MOA.
I also meant to mention that, IMO, if the stock is not attractive for investment then the underlying issues makes it also unattractive for partnering and or acquisition.
I think what we need is a competition centric leadership that is eager to try innovative, progressive improvements, and accelerate effort in all fronts.

Post Reply