Berkeley Scott Share Discussion Threads

[feelinlucky] 04/5/2003 14:31

LAST ONE OUT >>>>
PLEASE PLEASE DO SWITCH OFF THE LIGHTS.
THE FAT WOMAN HAS SUNG.
""OH THOSE WERE THE DAYS MY FRIEND...I THOUGHT IT WOULD NEVER END""
LALALAALALALALA.

GOODNIGHT AND MAY YOU RIP.

LUCKY.

[qazwsx123] 21/4/2003 11:21

If you are interested in biotechs, you may be interested in the expected news from Alizyme (AZM) as follows:

1) May 2003: PIIb results for Renzapride treating c-IBS (514 patients).
2) Mid 2003: first licensing deal for Colal-Pred.
3) Oct 2003: PIIb results for Renzapride treating m-IBS (170 patients).
4) Oct 2003: PIIb results for ATL-962 treating obesity (340 patients).
5) H2 2003: PIIa results for ATL-104 treating mucositis.
6) Q4 2003: further pharmacokinetic/dynamic results for Renzapride (48 patients in USA).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) 2004: licensing deals for Renzapride treating c-IBS & m-IBS.
8) 2004: licensing deal for ATL-962 treating obesity.
9) H2 2004: PIII results for Colal-Pred (active disease and remission trials).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10) H1 2005: Colal-Pred on market.

Sales of Colal-Pred treating active ulcerative colitis should exceed £100m pa, as should sales for maintaining remission; generating revenues of approximately £30 million pa for the Company (i.e. 15% royalties on annual sales of approximately £200 million) (Investor's Chronicle suggested 30% royalties, but that may be on the high side).

Sales of Renzapride, ATL-962 and ATL-104, should generate much higher revenues for Alizyme.

Brett Pollard of analysts Seymour Pierce estimates the licensing deals anticipated for Colal-Pred, Renzapride and ATL-962, during 2003/04, could bring in £50 million cash.

[hls4me] 08/1/2003 16:28

unfortunately Ernst and Young are as incompetent as KPMG, maybe in a deliberate attempt to protect each others ass. Especially if you consider that Ernst and Young were involved with Bioglan before the insolvency just as much as KPMG so how can they be neutral in selling the assets and then paying other creditors before themselves, the answer is they cannot. Nor can they lay blame without blaming themselves. The more people who complain to the FSA and DTI the more chance of an investigation also a letter tp Patricia Hewitt the minister responsible for DTI will also help, but it will take time.

[mali7] 03/1/2003 12:30

The bioglan house (their office property) is still for sale and Bioglan still have an office building that people go to work in the morning, so what is actually happening. (Saw my-self in Hitchin industrial estate).

As share holders what can we do when a company has lied such as in this situation????

[wetdream] 13/10/2002 18:55

ranirani,
have to be pretty special, as they've sold off all their assets-desks,PCs,chairs etc

[devil20] 13/10/2002 18:46

RANI. Can you enlighten us a bit!!
Mike.

[ranirani] 13/10/2002 07:20

Good-Luck!

[wetdream] 14/9/2002 00:34

In J Cleese's immortal words - 'This is a dead parrot'

[devil20] 13/9/2002 19:01

Lets pretend we're the pet-shopkeeper!
Mike.

[devil20] 20/8/2002 17:25

I still look in just in case a miracle happens! lol
Mike.

[fast player] 20/8/2002 13:37

LOL..

are you a holder???

[kanga8] 20/8/2002 13:35

Does anyone still look at this bb??????

[devil20] 23/7/2002 23:40

hls4me. At this time of night I was looking for a goodnight kiss, not
a stake in the heart!
Regards, Mike.

[hls4me] 23/7/2002 23:28

HAPPY READING

KPMG counts the cost of Bioglan
(Filed: 21/07/2002)


The treatment of two closely timed deals made a big difference to one year's profits. But later the auditor revised its advice. Richard Fletcher unravels the pharmaceutical group's accounts

January 31 2001 was a busy day for Terry Sadler, the chairman and chief executive of Bioglan Pharmaceuticals. It was the final day of the company's financial year and Sadler was putting the finishing touches to a series of deals.


Deal maker: Terry Sadler's Bioglan was at one point on the verge of the FTSE 100
By that evening Sadler had completed two deals that boosted 2001 profits by millions of pounds, and was just hours from completing a third. As he celebrated, the former salesman had no idea that in just over a year Bioglan, the company he founded, would be bust.

Rocked by the resignation of City advisers and allegations of aggressive accounting, Bioglan's bankers would pull the plug on Sadler in February 2002. Investors, who had seen Bioglan's stock market value reach £800m in 2000, would be left with nothing.

This weekend The Telegraph can reveal the extent of the aggressive accounting at Bioglan and how, as the 2001 financial year drew to a close, Sadler sealed a series of apparently circular deals.

An eight-page document, drawn up by Norton Rose, the City law firm and Bioglan's adviser, reveals how a series of transactions boosted profits on drug sales by $4m and licensing income by $6m. With stock markets gripped by a wave of accounting scandals, the document also raises questions about the relationship between auditors and the companies they oversee.

On January 31 2001, Sadler was pulling off what looked like a very attractive deal. Rodlen, a newly created US-based company, agreed to pay Bioglan $6m for a licence to develop Biosphere, a drug delivery technology, and $5m for stocks of Zostrix, a pain-relief drug.

Bioglan booked a $4m profit from the sale of Zostrix. According to Norton Rose, there was "$6m income" for Bioglan from selling the Biosphere licence.


Click to enlarge
Sadler, a 35 per cent shareholder, appeared to have secured two great contracts - yet another coup for the former salesman who bought Bioglan in 1985 by mortgaging his house and borrowing £30,000 on three gold credit cards.

But the sale of the licence and stock was not the end of Bioglan's dealings with Rodlen. The very next day, on February 1 2001, Sadler agreed to invest $13.3m for an 18 per cent stake in Rodlen, which was owned by a company called Winston, whose 19 per cent shareholder was none other than Bioglan.

To non-accountants the timing of transactions may not seem significant. But completing the investment in Rodlen just a few hours later than the Zostrix sales and the licensing deal would have a marked effect on the figures Bioglan was due to disclose to its shareholders a few months later.

The point is that the $11m generated from the sale of Zostrix and the licensing of Biospheres to Rodlen would be in the 2001 accounts - boosting profits and revenue.

But if the $13.3m investment in Rodlen was treated as a separate transaction in the next financial year, the effect of the investment on the company's balance sheet would not show until the publication of the 2002 figures, a whole year later.

KPMG, Bioglan's auditor, agreed that the sales and the investment were unrelated. The accountancy firm, which earned £377,000 in consultancy fees and £173,000 of audit fees from Bioglan in 2001, allowed the deals to be treated as separate.

There was a note in the final pages of the 2001 accounts disclosing that Bioglan had invested $13.3m in Oncovir (later renamed Rodlen) after the year-end, but this note did not mention the Zostrix and Biospheres deals.

That is not where it ended, however. Several months later, following the resignation of Peter Johnson, the newly appointed finance director of Bioglan, after just six weeks in the job, KPMG had a change of heart.

KPMG says that new information came to light. "Facts arose that led us to qualify our opinion," the firm told The Telegraph. "We spelled these out to shareholders in October."

Anyway, the Norton Rose document says that in September 2001 KPMG "raised a number of accounting issues" with the bio-tech firm. Norton Rose says the auditor was no longer certain that the deals struck on January 31 and February 1 were separate transactions and believed that the accounts should be restated.

The fact that the contract dates were so close and that the transactions were completed so near to Bioglan's year-end were now a concern to KPMG.

The auditor also regarded it as significant that payments between Rodlen and Bioglan had been netted off. On March 26 2001 Rodlen owed Bioglan $11m for the licence and stock and Bioglan owed Rodlen $13.3m for its 18 per cent stake and $1m for a separate European licence. In order to avoid "unnecessary transfer of funds, transaction costs and exchange rate risks" Bioglan paid Rodlen $3.3m.

In other words, $11m of revenues in the 2001 financial year were generated for Bioglan through its dealings with Rodlen booked on January 31; on February 1, Bioglan agreed to inject $13.3m into Rodlen; it booked a substantial profit from these $11m of revenues; but it ended up making a net cash payment to Rodlen of $3.3m.

The Norton Rose paper also says that KPMG had become worried that Rodlen's own accounts revealed that the US-based firm did not have the funds to "satisfy its financial commitments".

KPMG recommended changes in Bioglan's accounting policies and argued that Bioglan's 2001 accounts should be restated. KPMG no longer believed that the $11m generated from the Rodlen deals was "realised profits".

"This would have a very significant impact on B's [Bioglan's] reported profits," wrote Stephen Rigby, a partner at Norton Rose.

Sadler was apparently unimpressed. He insisted that the string of deals with Rodlen were not linked. In a letter to KPMG on September 17 2001 he argued that the deals were a series of "independent separate transactions".

Adjudication was required. On October 3 2001 Norton Rose sought advice from counsel on whether "it was a reasonable view to treat the transactions as separate".

A fortnight later Bioglan restated its 2001 results. On the new accounting approach, turnover fell £15.8m to £84.8m. Bioglan, which had originally reported a £12.5m pre-tax profit for the year ending January 31 2001, now said that it had made a pre-tax loss of £35.7m.

Just a few short months later, this former high-flyer was in the corporate graveyard.

[bensoni] 23/7/2002 22:23

what's the website address? i can't find it anywhere in this thread or could you just post something on here about what was said in the Telegraph

Cheers

[dag1967] 20/7/2002 10:03

Thanks,

I can't wait.

Will update the web site after.

DAG

[hls4me] 19/7/2002 20:37

DAG and all others who want the truth
Definate buy, this Sunday's telegraph

[devil20] 16/7/2002 10:57

mali7. To make money! They'll come back up again. Too much panic selling
over the last year or two. I just hold and hope for a better future.
Regards, Mike.

[mali7] 16/7/2002 10:45

IT'S ALL GONE!!!

Better to put money in normal ISA cash account, isn't.

Sitting on debt now. WHY DID I START TO TRADE FU>KK>>ING SHARES!!!!

[sidsmith] 19/6/2002 09:07

we're fukkd

[devil20] 06/6/2002 10:41

And I take it thats it for us? Or has anyone any updates.
Regards Mike.

[hls4me] 14/5/2002 09:12

Bioglan AB, Drug delivery and Solaraze were Bioglans last remaining assets of value, so the banks get back a few million, Andersen's walk out with a big payoff and the corrupt directors and auditors (KPMG) walk away to do it again and again again. Not a bad system.

[dag1967] 13/5/2002 23:12

Benjuya, here is the RNS :

RNS Number:8045V
Skyepharma PLC
13 May 2002


For Immediate Release 13 May 2002


Re-license of Solaraze European rights to Shire for up to £15m and Acquisition
of Bioglan's drug delivery technology portfolio



LONDON, 13 May 2002 -- SkyePharma PLC (LSE:SKP / NASDAQ:SKYE) today announced
its agreement to transfer all rights to market Solaraze in Europe to Shire
Pharmaceuticals (LSE:SHP / NASDAQ:SHPGY / TSE:SHQ CN) (Shire) for a total
consideration up to £15 million. Of this, £2.1 million is contingent on
conditions including Solaraze's launch in certain European countries. In
addition, SkyePharma will receive royalties on all European sales from Shire.
European marketing rights for Solaraze were previously licensed to Bioglan
Pharma PLC (Bioglan) whose affairs were placed into administration on 21
February 2002.



Solaraze is a topical therapy for actinic keratosis, an under-treated,
pre-cancerous skin condition that may result from excessive sun exposure. The
product is approved for marketing in five European countries, and was launched
in the UK, Germany and Sweden by Bioglan during 2001.



Also announced today, Bioglan's administrators have sold Bioglan AB, its Swedish
subsidiary, to Wilh. Sonesson, a Swedish healthcare company. In a separate
transaction, SkyePharma has acquired from Bioglan AB its entire drug delivery
business for UK£2.8 million in cash, additionally assuming approximately UK£1.1
million of net liabilities. The acquired rights include Bioglan's Biosphere
technology and those rights to DermaStick, Crystalip and ES-Gel topical drug
delivery technologies that remained with Bioglan after a January 2001
development and commercialisation licensing agreement with SkyePharma.



Michael Ashton, SkyePharma's Chief Executive Officer, commented, "Shire's strong
European marketing credentials will ensure the rapid market expansion for
Solaraze in this important territory. With this agreement in place, we can now
look forward to a focused campaign highlighting Solaraze's ease of use, safety
and effectiveness in treating this growing medical problem."



"At the same time, we are pleased to have acquired the remaining rights from
Bioglan's topical drug delivery business. It is our belief that the combination
of these technologies with our own will create arguably the broadest, most
versatile skill set for delivering drugs onto or into the skin."



"With regard to the Biosphere injectable technology, it will complement our
DepoFoam sustained release injectable expertise in providing additional delivery
options for proteins and peptides."



This press release may contain forward-looking statements regarding SkyePharma
PLC. Actual results may differ materially from those described in the press
release as a result of a number of factors, including but not limited to the
following: There can be no assurance that Solaraze will be successfully
manufactured, or that patient and physician acceptance of Solaraze will be
achieved. The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update any such
forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of
this release.



For further information please contact:

SkyePharma PLC [phone]
Donald Nicholson, Chief Finance Officer
Valerie Tate, Head of Investor Relations
Sandra Haughton, US Investor Relations [phone]

Buchanan Communications [phone]
Tim Anderson / Nicola How



Notes to the Editor

SkyePharma PLC, one of the world's leading drug delivery companies, provides
innovative services to major pharmaceutical partners from the point of drug
discovery through the approval process. Its five technologies, oral, injectable,
inhalation, topical, and nanoparticulate solubilisation encompass the vast
majority of delivery systems in use by the pharmaceutical industry. For more
information, visit www.skyepharma.com.



Shire Pharmaceuticals Group plc is a rapidly growing international speciality
pharmaceutical company with a strategic focus on three therapeutic areas -
central nervous system disorders, oncology and anit-infectives. Shire's core
strategy is based on research and development combined with in-licensing and a
focus on eight key pharmaceutical markets. For further information on Shire,
visit www.shire.com.



Topical Drug Delivery Technologies

Crystalip enhances stability of drugs by embedding them in lipid crystals.
Suitable for hydrophilic or hydrophobic drugs, the drug is released as the lipid
melts at skin temperature.



DermaStick presents the active ingredient in a wax stick, which facilitates
controlled application to affected skin.



ES Gel is a semi-solid formulation producing enhanced solubility of drugs and
providing substantially increased bioavailability by the transdermal route.



Biosphere

The Biosphere drug delivery system provides sustained release of injectable
proteins and peptides. The first human administration of coated and un-coated
starch Biosphere microspheres containing no active drug took place in 2001. The
study, involving sixteen subjects, is complete and no significant adverse
reactions were reported.



This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

[bensoni] 13/5/2002 19:45

Benjuya,

What announcement was that? please let me know.