Could there be worse marketers in the world?

Quote

Anonymous

Guest
How many times have you heard "Zytiga is $5K while Provenge is $93K".

I gather that you normally take Zytiga for 18-22 months, so it's $100K give or take
$10K

Provenge is given 3 times. Why don't they promote it as being $31K/dose and you only need 3 of them and they don't make you as sick as a dog like the 20 doses of Zytiga?

Well, now they don't because they want the company buried by year end.

But, wasn't there a time in the past when the BoD held stock and wanted this PoS to succeed?
 












Some analysis from another BB:

"Per my analysis, DNDN has ~$200M in annual fixed mfg costs... $80M for NJ, 60M for LA, and $60M for Atl.

PV has an 18 hour shelf life, so a 1 plant operation is a non-starter... as is "Schiffman actually said"

If they close NJ, they save $80M but LA and Atl probably increase some... so let's model $75M each post-restructuring for a total of $150M in annual fixed mfg costs.

Schiffman has guided that variable costs are ~20% of net sales, so let's model gross margins at various sales level.

$300M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 60M var costs = 210M COGS = 90M gross margin, or 30.0%
$400M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 80M var costs = 230M COGS = 170M gross margin, or 42.5%
$500M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 100M var costs = 250M COGS = 250M gross margin, or 50.0%
$600M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 120M ver costs = 270M COGS = 330M gross margin, or 55.0%

As a stand alone business with $600M in sales, DNDN probably needs $100M in R&D to sustain the business and $250M in SG&A to maintain the business... and then there's another $50M in Other Expenses which results in a Net Loss of $70M... again, that's the definition of a flawed business model.

And as far as any synergies with BP, there's very few... DNDN is a new paradigm that operates in a very expensive mode outside of the box... and then there's the contingent liabilities from 8/3/11 and the other lawsuits.

So no, there'll be no BP buyout at any double digit price... DNDN will die-on-the-vine over the next 12 months and some BP vulture will pick the carcass clean for DNDN's ACI platform after the 2016 convert holders force DNDN's hand."
 






Anonymous said:
Some analysis from another BB:

"Per my analysis, DNDN has ~$200M in annual fixed mfg costs... $80M for NJ, 60M for LA, and $60M for Atl.

PV has an 18 hour shelf life, so a 1 plant operation is a non-starter... as is "Schiffman actually said"

If they close NJ, they save $80M but LA and Atl probably increase some... so let's model $75M each post-restructuring for a total of $150M in annual fixed mfg costs.

Schiffman has guided that variable costs are ~20% of net sales, so let's model gross margins at various sales level.

$300M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 60M var costs = 210M COGS = 90M gross margin, or 30.0%
$400M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 80M var costs = 230M COGS = 170M gross margin, or 42.5%
$500M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 100M var costs = 250M COGS = 250M gross margin, or 50.0%
$600M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 120M ver costs = 270M COGS = 330M gross margin, or 55.0%

As a stand alone business with $600M in sales, DNDN probably needs $100M in R&D to sustain the business and $250M in SG&A to maintain the business... and then there's another $50M in Other Expenses which results in a Net Loss of $70M... again, that's the definition of a flawed business model.

And as far as any synergies with BP, there's very few... DNDN is a new paradigm that operates in a very expensive mode outside of the box... and then there's the contingent liabilities from 8/3/11 and the other lawsuits.

So no, there'll be no BP buyout at any double digit price... DNDN will die-on-the-vine over the next 12 months and some BP vulture will pick the carcass clean for DNDN's ACI platform after the 2016 convert holders force DNDN's hand."
Click to expand...

The problem with a urologist as CEO, he probably didn't get high school math. sigh
 






Hopefully that idiotic poster will "die on the vine". What a completely stupid analysis. He is short the Dendreon stock but is too cowardly to admit it. He is talking his book. To assume the same $150 million fixed manufacturing costs against all revenue levels and indefinetly into the future is complete nonsense. Automation and efficiency will easily bring that number down with time.

"Needs $100 million in R&D to sustain the business" more stupidity. Neuvenge is not necessary to sustain the business. It is a discretionary expenditure.

Utter nonsense post from a complete jerk. Something you certainly know a lot about.
 






Anonymous said:
Some analysis from another BB:

"Per my analysis, DNDN has ~$200M in annual fixed mfg costs... $80M for NJ, 60M for LA, and $60M for Atl.

PV has an 18 hour shelf life, so a 1 plant operation is a non-starter... as is "Schiffman actually said"

If they close NJ, they save $80M but LA and Atl probably increase some... so let's model $75M each post-restructuring for a total of $150M in annual fixed mfg costs.

Schiffman has guided that variable costs are ~20% of net sales, so let's model gross margins at various sales level.

$300M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 60M var costs = 210M COGS = 90M gross margin, or 30.0%
$400M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 80M var costs = 230M COGS = 170M gross margin, or 42.5%
$500M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 100M var costs = 250M COGS = 250M gross margin, or 50.0%
$600M sales = 150M fixed mfg costs + 120M ver costs = 270M COGS = 330M gross margin, or 55.0%

As a stand alone business with $600M in sales, DNDN probably needs $100M in R&D to sustain the business and $250M in SG&A to maintain the business... and then there's another $50M in Other Expenses which results in a Net Loss of $70M... again, that's the definition of a flawed business model.

And as far as any synergies with BP, there's very few... DNDN is a new paradigm that operates in a very expensive mode outside of the box... and then there's the contingent liabilities from 8/3/11 and the other lawsuits.

So no, there'll be no BP buyout at any double digit price... DNDN will die-on-the-vine over the next 12 months and some BP vulture will pick the carcass clean for DNDN's ACI platform after the 2016 convert holders force DNDN's hand."
Click to expand...

interesting...

right now, we have $320M/yr in "selling and general admin" and just $80M in research.

As you've said, our facilities cost $200M, yet our execs were saying $400M was break even!

Even now, the suits are crazy unrealistic.
 






Anonymous said:
Hopefully that idiotic poster will "die on the vine". What a completely stupid analysis. He is short the Dendreon stock but is too cowardly to admit it. He is talking his book. To assume the same $150 million fixed manufacturing costs against all revenue levels and indefinetly into the future is complete nonsense. Automation and efficiency will easily bring that number down with time.

"Needs $100 million in R&D to sustain the business" more stupidity. Neuvenge is not necessary to sustain the business. It is a discretionary expenditure.

Utter nonsense post from a complete jerk. Something you certainly know a lot about.
Click to expand...

now that's a dumb post!

The market for Provenge or any drug in this space isn't indefinite. We do indeed need a pipeline to sustain the business.
 












Anonymous said:
In the long run they need to run drug trials. In the short to intermediate term they most certainly do not.
Click to expand...

With the fast pace of biotech and the slow pace of clinical trials (and drug launch!)---and with MDVN already on their tails; we can't slow down the pipeline. We'd be in so much better shape now if we'd built only 2 facilities and done the Neuvenge test (ok, the pumper/dumper man didn't help).

It's also the value in the company. The rest of it has been so tainted and poorly executed, nobody wants the suits and facilities, the only thing we have of value are the labs and the IP.
 






We have a drug generating over $300 million a year less than 12 months after receiving a Medicare billing code. That certainly is a valuable and meaningful number. Provenge sales will grow.

Minor quarterly declines occur during long-term product growth phases. Many successful drugs have had down quarters in their history. John Johnson's last big product, Erbitux, was only generating $645 million in sales for Imclone when he sold it to Lilly for $6.5 billion in 2008. Erbitux had quarterly sales declines in its history. Imclone's gross margins were only 39% in 2008. In 2007. Imclone revenues were lower than 2006. In 2008, Imclone had its 3rd straight year of profit declines. Pretax income was only $180 million in 2008, the year Johnson sold the company.

Dendreon costs are being cut. Profits will come in time. Dendreon's share price is currently considerably undervalued.
 






Anonymous said:
Profits will come in time.
Click to expand...

Since you appear to be an expert on Dendreon, can you tell us how profits can possibly come before the need to raise more cash?

Cash will need to be raised when there is about a year of cash left. Dendreon's last cash raise came when there was well over 200M in cash.

Since serious crimes happened and they are currently being investigated, who will pay all the fines and the class actions which would surely be winners if and when indictments and/or settlements occur. Many people beleive that DO insurance doesn't pay class actions and fines when crimes have occurred.

Can you explain what interest the BOD has for future success of Dendreon? They are barely invested and if you could read their minds, it would seem they want to be as far removed from this company as possible with embarrassing depositions on the horizon in the class actions. People who are not highly motivated are not going to achieve success.

Can you explain why Dendreon currently has a criminal on the BOD? The rest of the BOD probably doesnt want him there. They probably blame him for being the mastermind of the crimes that they are in trouble for too. Does he remain because everyone is complicit?

Can you explain what a Medivation approval is going to mean for this company?

Your simple explanation that Provenge is going to be profitable while Dendreon owns the rights to it just doesn't stand the test of scrutiny. Provenge might be profitable at some point in time, but it will be long after Dendreon no longer exists.

If you are going to throw out the word "profits", it is only fair that you explain your belief.
 






Anonymous said:
Dendreon's share price is currently considerably undervalued.
Click to expand...

And you are smarter than sophisticated investors? What are your credentials to tell us the financial markets have this all wrong? If it is considerably undervalued, wouldnt any BP or hostile takeover candidate be interested? If you think the real value is 15, why doesn't BP? Why doesn't Carl Icahn see this company as undervalued? Why does Citi see this company possibly unable to even pay back the bondholders? Why is your word smarter than theirs? What are your credentials?
 






Positive cash flow will come with $100 million in quarterly sales. Profits will come with $125 million in quarterly sales. That will happen before a need for additional capital. Provenge is still early in its launch. Provenge first received a Medicare billing code 1 year ago.

I have had enough of your daily posting of lies. You are constantly posting "bankruptcy" or "liquidation". Neither one will happen. Debt workouts happen all the time in business. The debt matures in 2016. If a workout is needed for Dendreon at the 2016, the maturity date will be extended. Worst case the debt is paid off with stock through dilution. It is Dendreon's option to repay with shares.

To say that management would want to bankrupt the company is complete nonsense. They have a significant amount of shares. They want a high value not a zero value.

You constantly mislead or misinform for destructive purposes. You post the same meaningless nonsense on a daily basis.
 






Anonymous said:
We have a drug generating over $300 million a year less than 12 months after receiving a Medicare billing code. That certainly is a valuable and meaningful number. Provenge sales will grow.

Minor quarterly declines occur during long-term product growth phases. Many successful drugs have had down quarters in their history. John Johnson's last big product, Erbitux, was only generating $645 million in sales for Imclone when he sold it to Lilly for $6.5 billion in 2008. Erbitux had quarterly sales declines in its history. Imclone's gross margins were only 39% in 2008. In 2007. Imclone revenues were lower than 2006. In 2008, Imclone had its 3rd straight year of profit declines. Pretax income was only $180 million in 2008, the year Johnson sold the company.

Dendreon costs are being cut. Profits will come in time. Dendreon's share price is currently considerably undervalued.
Click to expand...


Gosh, I wonder why the entire BoD has dumped this undervalued stock?

I always thought they knew more than you and me.
 






Current share price means nothing. The share price was $2 one year before it went to $57. Short term the market knows nothing. 13 months ago Citi had a price target of $80 per share. Obviously they are often wrong.
 












Erbitux revenues were $700 million in 2011. Imclone with Erbitux as sole product sold for $6.5 billion in 2008. Erbitux was first approved in 2004. It took big pharma 4 years to figure out the value of Erbitux and buy Imclone.

http://www.fiercepharma.com/special-reports/top-10-best-selling-cancer-drugs/erbitux-7033-million

Imclone at time of 2008 acquisition had $600 million in cash, over $700 million in debt, revenues in latest fiscal year were $591 million (and down by $87 million from prior year), had only $40 million in net income for the year. Gross margins were consistently below 50%. Acquiried for $6.5 billion.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/765258/000104746908002103/a2183116z10-k.htm

This is all the truth, unlike most of the meaningless nonsense posted here by shorts out to damage Dendreon.
 






Anonymous said:
13 months ago Citi had a price target of $80 per share. Obviously they are often wrong.
Click to expand...

Companys set expectations before analysts and as you will see, within the next year someone will be in prison for lying to analysts and lying to investors. How dare you.

You did not address anything that was asked. You have ZERO credibility to repeat the same thing with no answers and no explanations.
 






Anonymous said:
BOD has not sold a single share in past year other than to pay tax liabilities. Two directors have bought shares in last year.
Click to expand...

You foolish idiot. The stock is at $5. If the board liked the prospects of the stock they would buy tons of it. Some loser bought 40k. There are multi multi millionaires. Gold has 60M dollars. If he liked the prospcts he would buy 5M or 10M at 5. It doesn't matter how many free shares they have. If they like the prospects of the company at 5 they would buy a lot more.

The bottom line is that this BOD knows how grave the situation is legally and competitionwise and the fact that they will have to raise more cash when they go through another 250M. Last time they raised cash they had 250M.

I am not the person who talks about bankruptcy. I talk about being forced to sell the company before they have to raise cash which would be when cash gets to 250M. This company will be sold before end of 1st quarter 2013. The buyer will be assuming the convert liability as well as the class action liability. By the end of first quarter, potential buyers will know more about the class action liability and if insurance will cover it. By then, some people will be in prison and that will be a good indication of who pays the class actions. The takeout price will be whatever someone values the company minus 600M for the bonds and maybe 500M for the class actions.
 






Anonymous said:
BOD has not sold a single share in past year other than to pay tax liabilities. Two directors have bought shares in last year.
Click to expand...

Tax liabilities can be paid out of their own pocket. If they like the prospects at 5, they would pay tax liabilities out of their own pocket. You are a fraud to say selling for tax liabilities is different. If tax liabiliites is large its because they have a lot of income and can pay it out of their own pocket. If they truly believed D'Enron would give them the best chance of a return on their money, they would pay taxes out of their own money. They know better than to invest in D'Enron. They would rather be in treasuries than D'Enron.
 






Top Bottom
Back
Quote