Reading between the lines
Sept 12, 2016 12:39:17 GMT -5
Think2Succeed, okkotip51, and 4 more like this
Post by Bio Boy Scout on Sept 12, 2016 12:39:17 GMT -5
Arrowhead is now in a very unique position, as I posted on Twitter, that being in an open-label study is a double-edged sword. The analysis is pretty simple, and it should be somewhat easy to figure out if bad news is coming. Here is the reasoning:
1) A company cannot promote their stock if they possess material information to the contrary - this would be in violation of SEC rules and regulations;
2) Being in an open-label study means that the company is in possession of material information about their drug in near real-time (as Arrowhead management is quoted as saying);
3) If the open-label study discloses information that a reasonable scientist would likely conclude as BAD news, then the company cannot mislead the public to the contrary, as this would be an improper stock price promotion in violation of SEC rules and regulations; and
4) If the open-label study discloses information that a reasonable scientist would likely conclude as GOOD news, then the company can continue to promote their stock regardless of whether or not they disclose this information.
Given this last talk from Dr. Anzalone, IMO I easily come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no negative news regarding ARC-520, AND that the belief of getting a functional cure from ARC-520 is still valid in light of the near real-time data they're receiving in the Monarch open-label study. I have a feeling that just prior to the private offering, Dr. Anzalone probably gave a presentation to the private offering investors reiterating his standard presentation (with no new information), thereby guaranteeing to the investors that a functional cure is still very possible and/or likely. What people fail to grasp when Dr. Anzalone, or anyone else from Arrowhead, makes a presentation with no new information is that no bad news has come to light since the last presentation - this is much more major than you could imagine.
So if someone from Arrowhead makes a presentation 3 months from now touting ARC-520 with no new information, the key takeaway will be that there is no bad news and there still is a possibility of great news in the near future. If Arrowhead goes silent and stops presenting anything on ARC-520, then it may be time to start worrying, as they cannot promote their stock if they are in possession of material information to the contrary. This is, and always has been, the way that biotech companies operate.
1) A company cannot promote their stock if they possess material information to the contrary - this would be in violation of SEC rules and regulations;
2) Being in an open-label study means that the company is in possession of material information about their drug in near real-time (as Arrowhead management is quoted as saying);
3) If the open-label study discloses information that a reasonable scientist would likely conclude as BAD news, then the company cannot mislead the public to the contrary, as this would be an improper stock price promotion in violation of SEC rules and regulations; and
4) If the open-label study discloses information that a reasonable scientist would likely conclude as GOOD news, then the company can continue to promote their stock regardless of whether or not they disclose this information.
Given this last talk from Dr. Anzalone, IMO I easily come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no negative news regarding ARC-520, AND that the belief of getting a functional cure from ARC-520 is still valid in light of the near real-time data they're receiving in the Monarch open-label study. I have a feeling that just prior to the private offering, Dr. Anzalone probably gave a presentation to the private offering investors reiterating his standard presentation (with no new information), thereby guaranteeing to the investors that a functional cure is still very possible and/or likely. What people fail to grasp when Dr. Anzalone, or anyone else from Arrowhead, makes a presentation with no new information is that no bad news has come to light since the last presentation - this is much more major than you could imagine.
So if someone from Arrowhead makes a presentation 3 months from now touting ARC-520 with no new information, the key takeaway will be that there is no bad news and there still is a possibility of great news in the near future. If Arrowhead goes silent and stops presenting anything on ARC-520, then it may be time to start worrying, as they cannot promote their stock if they are in possession of material information to the contrary. This is, and always has been, the way that biotech companies operate.
