IS Pharma Share Discussion Threads

[gogoneko] 20/4/2010 16:14

Unfortunately they'll have to wax lyrical about how well Variquel could have been doing had the FDA not requested the additional clinical trial which represents a setback to the company's ambitious projected revenue generation (and may have indeed been a contributor to the disposal through lack of anticipated royalty receipt). Not that any projected revenues from the US would have been little more than of negligible value, judging by the opinion of certain contributors!?

[steeplejack] 20/4/2010 15:26

Or until they start waxing lyrical about how well Variquel has done in the second half of the year.

[wjccghcc] 20/4/2010 15:23

Fair enough but then they should say "underlying" EPS. To me, all other key parameters includes profit before tax so I'll take the materially ahead EPS as being due to a lower than expected tax rate or the exceptional gain until they clarify it.

[steeplejack] 20/4/2010 15:13

"The Company is therefore pleased to announce that results for the year ending 31
March 2010 are expected to show post tax profits and earnings per share
materially ahead of expectations and in line on all other key parameters."


Other key parameters i presume would include turnover,balance sheet gearing,cash in hand etc.The company will be well aware that exceptional items above and extraordinary items below the line will be excluded when city analysts calculate the eps,PER. It would therefore be fairly absurd to state that eps are materially ahead of expectations because of an unforseeable profit on a disposal which will be stripped out of analyst computations.Thus,i'm going to take the statement at face value and conclude that profits from "trading" have exceeded expectations.That's what the market seems to have done.

[clogue] 20/4/2010 14:04

steeplejack, WJCCGHCC,

Does seem a bit strange and I will try to contact the company and get an answer.
Would be good to try and set up some sensible exchange of views here, whither we are in agreement or not.
Will post as soon as I have any word from the company.

[wjccghcc] 20/4/2010 13:54

steeplejack, they do say in the statement that net income and EPS are materially ahead of expectations but that PBT is in line. I hate to say it but that implies it's either an exceptional gain from the disposal or a low tax rate that has made EPS beat.

[clogue] 20/4/2010 13:52

"Is Pharma will receive an immediate cash payment of $1.25m....IS Pharma will also receive royalties once the brand is launched"
From this, any rational person can deduce that approval (which I believe will come) is not a major factor for the company. FDA approval would be nice but is nowhere near a major cause for concern for the company.
As far as the recent disposals are concerned, I explained my thoughts on this in some detail and I note the company stated today that it would be concentrating on "higher margin products"
The next set of results which are to be ahead of market expectations and you seem to be saying that management can sell of a product for £1.4m , issue a RNS, wait a month and then slip it onto the bottom line and say that they beat expectations.
Even if they could achieve this neat trick you seem to be ignoring the fact that they recently spent £1.5m on acquiring the rights to episil which fits very well into their product range.

Oh sod it !! I'm fed up with this. Why don't you sit down, have a nice cup of tea and tell us all what's really bothering you ?
There, there.

[gogoneko] 20/4/2010 12:33

The management wrongdoing issue has been settled already if you'd actually read the posts - companies don't announce wrongdoings but you can sense when the wheels are falling off the wagon when directors undersell an asset!

So I've got a better idea; rather than giving your personal snippets of opinion as fact and challenging others to find fault, why don't you back up your statements made in #225? Tell us the one about ISPH selling the US rights last year and we'll compare your version to what's in the company's RNS history! Then give your grounds for saying that the FDA approval "should" come soon (as far as I'm concerned it's taking long enough to be far more cautious), and that any revenues derived won't be that important because "turnover and profit will be so high". Looking at a recent interim PBT of £0.5m does that fall into the "so high" category?

[steeplejack] 20/4/2010 12:22

It is not clear to me how you can assume that the £1.4m sales proceeds from the sale of Volpex and Isoplex will be treated as an exceptional item above the line.If the company is boasting of exceeding market expectations because of a one off,one can be cynical indeed.However ,there are analysts in the City who scrutinise this data and talk to the company and if the price rise is anything to go by,the analysts reckon the company is making genuinely solid progress.

If one doesn't trust the management you should sell.Plenty of other fish in the sea.

[gogoneko] 20/4/2010 09:21

clogue,

I was using this morning's RNS, you've obviously read a different one.

"The Company is therefore pleased to announce that results for the year ending 31
March 2010 are expected to show post tax profits and earnings per share
materially ahead of expectations and in line on all other key parameters"

"in line" performance except for where they can misleadingly claim to be making progress thanks to a last-minute fire sale, hardly dynamic company doing so well!

Oh yeah! And that unimportant US market penetration which won't make a difference!?!? And I'd check up on the "sold the US rights" spin if I were you as it's a bit misleading.

[clogue] 20/4/2010 08:43

Great to see this dynamic company doing so well.I especially like the way the cost of acquiring the exclusive rights to Episil was paid for by the sale of Volplex and Isoplex, so balancing the books.
Variquel is doing very well and FDA approval should come soon but this is not highly significant to the company as they sold the US rights last year(great move by management). When FDA approval does come ISPH will pick up some royalty payments but I suspect that, give the growth rate and excellent management, turnover and profit will be so high that these royalty payments will not be that important.

[gogoneko] 20/4/2010 07:19

Very disappointing. Still no news on Variquel from the US, which I assume is having problems getting FDA approval, and obviously, with the disposal of Volplex/Isoplex, the eventual numbers were going to be ahead of expectations, so the machine trundles on slowly ....

I'd say that at 62.5p the stock is fairly priced, although I'm that sure the MMs will open higher and it'll eventually retest the 50's again in due course.

[the_hedge] 01/4/2010 23:04

certainly some interesting trades coming in at the end of the day.

[gogoneko] 01/4/2010 16:52

It would be nice signal if they're pre-close director purchases.

[geraldus] 01/4/2010 16:49

Agree with your comments gogoneko.Some large late trades shown up now - interesting.

[gogoneko] 01/4/2010 16:41

The numbers shouldn't be bad as they've just had an easy £1.4m windfall. Anyway! Notwithstanding that, Variquel had got to 25% of the UK market share according to their last update in Jan and other markets appear to be doing well.

It'd be very nice to be updated (positively) on the situation regarding Variquel and the FDA in any update as back in Dec they'd said "In the US, the FDA has issued a Complete Response Letter for Lucassin (US tradename for Variquel). Our US partners plan to meet with the FDA in the coming months. "... so they should have heard by now.

[geraldus] 01/4/2010 15:56

Back into these again after a fortunate sell a while ago.Update later this month,can't see it being that bad? - G.Spotts

[clogue] 25/3/2010 11:27

Gogoneko; The board has acted in a way that fits exactly their stated aim for the company. The sale of products that don't , or no longer, fit the larger plan, is what they are there to do.
I note that you implied that there was some underhand dealing here, but can't supply any evidence for it.
I simply made a request for information (I'll even take unsubstantiated suspicions).
As far as me blindly accepting what a company says,I can only say that I have enough sense to work out that if you have a low margin product that is expensive to maintain and promote, and does not fit in with your other products, then getting one year's sales for it is a good deal.
I can also work out that if this product is simply being treated as a commodity and equivalent products are being supplied by other, much larger, companies then the margin is being squeezed and one years sales must represent many year's profit.
The fact that another company can make more from it is the reason ISpharma got such a good deal.

[gogoneko] 25/3/2010 10:55

clogue,

You somehow appear to expect listed company boards to notify investors of improper actions! In the real world that doesn't happen, does it? I'm sure that the vast majority of investors reading these posts can provide many examples of seriously unpleasant activity by corporate directors which have not been in the interest of shareholders... but do they represent "improper actions"? Of course not, they represent bad actions, which is what IMO we have here.

I prefer to interpret (incorrectly or otherwise!) what I read, not simply read and accept, so maybe this is why there's a difference between our viewpoints.

[clogue] 25/3/2010 10:39

I notice that there has been no response to my request for information regarding any improper actions taken by the board.(post 208)

[carwhite] 25/3/2010 08:15

it was far from the best price which indicates to me financial problems 'tat mill lad.

[gogoneko] 24/3/2010 17:46

You appear to have misread what I've written - my contention throughout has been that they've undersold Isoplex and Volplex for some reason. There's been no change in that respect.

[red ninja] 24/3/2010 17:23

Well done for admitting the weakness of your previous points