I think the point is that there was an expectation for Teva to take up more applications.
The question was about whether it was an error or good strategy for SI to not take more to stage 3 earlier, and why leave so many applications not fully developed.
The point is that it's hugely expensive to take an application to market, about USD $1 billion for most bios. But the costs will come down for stem cell FDA testing as the amount of patients needed, and clinical trials get cut short as practice is refined in this revolutionary therapy.
MSB's strategy to do this (despite the IPO which seems to have involved an element of ambush), remains sound in terms of the halo effect of several stage 3 clinical trials, income from aGVHD and with the other potential JV partners in negotiations for the other applications. The fast tracking involved with aGVHD and the half time FDA review for the heart and disk applications with a view to fast tracking is also very good news.
So I'd say the strategy is a very good one. It wouldn't have been smart to try to get too many to market at once; a quick way for a biotech to go broke.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)