From todays AFR, page-2

MARKET OVERREACTS
“If we report something, we’re not going to put a spin on it or sugar coat it, we present it as it is,” Wong says. “And I think maybe investors were saying ‘well if they’re presenting it like this, without any spin, it must be worse than what they’re saying’. That’s what they’re used to with most other companies.”
He says the results were a “misread” leading to a market “overreaction” and investors should take the time to look into results more carefully. He’s confident that Sirtex’s core shareholder base now knows that.


Gillman are you serious how do you think the market was going to respond to a 1 line statement that basically said "It did not achieve its PRIMARY END POINT " particularly when there was a snowballs chance it ever would given that in so many patients the cancer had already spread to other organs.

"By the way we appear to have some good results for the secondary end point " ie where the cancer was constrained to the liver.

The design of the whole trial seemed to have been compromised from the outset with no chance of reaching the primary end point. So to blame the "market" for not reading the results correctly is just bs.

To this point I have significant concerns with regards how they will report the next set of trials and has the design of the trial end points been compromised by the patient cohort.

Does anyone know how the Primary end point has been determined and is it achievable?

Must be getting paranoid leading up the next set of results from the trials.

Have Sirtex learnt anything about presenting the initial results of a trial to the market, does not seem so as they "will just present it as it is, no sugar coating" maybe an informed release might be more appropriate for a company such as Sirtex

Rayda