Undoubtedly the company has faltered and performed poorly in recent years due to inept management, poor direction, and poorly handled applications for their drug approvals, I wholeheartedly agree.
I am a long term investor who stands to make bugger all at the end of the day.. I am a research scientist with an MBA, and full well acknowledge the fact that this whole process was not done with the scrutiny required, and under a different leadership may have been approved first time round. I read the document linked to the EMA released on 17th March, and the simple fact that safety issues surrounding the self administration were not highlighted and addressed prior to the initial experimental design was indicative of their lack of what should have been a core competency. This ultimately led to the application attracting a negative benefit/risk ratio causing its submission retraction.
My current gripe with the mis-information and conjecture is that people, I believe, are either naive, or purposefully trying to increase doubt so as to drop the price so they can buy in and cash out when the takeover occurs.
Notes to do with Pearson announcement on Valeants takeover of cephalon; the comment 'You are quite aware that investments in early-stage development programs are inconsistent with our strategy' refers directly to Cephalons recent purchase of Gemin X and their early stage oncology drugs.
Valeants strategy is in late stage drugs as their strategy is not RnD. People have wrongly referred this comment to Chemgenex, which is not the case.
I do, however, concede that Valeant is committed to non-ocological drugs and will likely spin off this component of cephalon should the takeover succeed, but this will likely have little or no impact on cephalons bid for chemgenex.
I for one am confident that the takeover will proceed based on the information presented.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?