We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| York Pharma | YRK | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 3.25 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.25 | 3.25 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 13/8/2009 10:10 by awe430save132 You`ve prob lost quite a bit Topinfo with this dog and i`m sorry to hear hit.I suggest you just move on, there`s no point beating yourself up about it. Take the hit ,learn the lesson and you`ll be a better investor in the future. |
Posted at 27/7/2009 20:54 by topvest The end of YRK. It took a while, but unfortunately this looked inevitable. Sadler made the same mistake as Bioglan and borrowed, even though he said he wouldn't make the same error again! We never heard about Abasol did we. Some high profile investors lost their shirt on this. I managed to break-even which is better than most. Had no shares left at the end. We've all learnt a lesson on this one though. Bioshark was correct. I'd love to know the truth on Abasol formally, but guess we will never know unless the administrators report (issued in a month or two normally) tells the real story! |
Posted at 15/7/2009 20:13 by topinfo I tell you what though Guys maybe just maybe their advisors have been trying to hold off announcing deal until some stability returned to the markets. What a belting time now to announce deal and relist shares. Dow up 500 points in last two sessions, markets flying around the world and investors piling back into stocks. If they announced deal now it will fly and thats for sure, maybe thats the reason for the delay.? |
Posted at 13/7/2009 20:48 by risk1 yes I hated the guy posting here 2 years agobut sometimes you have to applaud a shrewd investor well done bioshark |
Posted at 20/3/2009 18:40 by kiki14p Oh well, was expecting to see results today for the year to 30 Sept 08, to get an idea on how much revenue the derms development products were producing, so will have to wait a little longer.Not good news that the company have had to receive short term funding from a potential offeror to continue trading. On the other hand the potential offeror must be pretty confident to provide this funding. My guess is that it is an existing investor probably Chris Evans through his excalibur/merlin investment funds. Interesting that a second potential offeror has entered the frey, maybe we could see a bit of a bidding war! That is if either think there is anything worth fighting over. In normal times the products would be able to fetch a multiple of between 2-3 times revenues (depending on margins), however whether York could command such a figure is debateable as the offerors are in a very strong position with York on its last legs. Companies House show that a company called York Pharmacare Ltd was incorporated today. Wonder what this is all about - linked to the potential offer maybe?? |
Posted at 16/1/2009 09:55 by jpendle This also may cause the sales collaboration with sinclair to collapse now we can't offer the sales that were presumably promised?What a mess, of the boards own making - expanding during a credit squeeze and borrowing from a dubious source. But the worst thing is that they were so nieve as to try to do a deal behind the back of the new investor - see RNS. If we didn't have the money to complete the deal we shouldn't have gone forward - director ego surfacing again I suppose. Thought of averaging down but resisted the temptation as I suspect this may be one for the administrator. |
Posted at 15/1/2009 19:58 by handycam Like other alternative-investmeFortress' liquid hedge-fund segment -- which includes Drawbridge Global Macro and Fortress Commodities Funds -- accounts for $9.1 billion worth of capital, and clients can ask for their money back at the end of every quarter. The most recent available figures show that clients demanded $5.6 billion of their cash back in 2008. Fortress' other hedge-fund business -- a hybrid one that includes Drawbridge Special Opportunities Funds and Fortress Partners Funds -- accounted for $8.2 billion worth of capital. Although those funds have more strings attached to redemptions, clients still asked to withdraw $2.3 billion last year. Jeffries & Co. analyst Daniel T. Fannon estimates that when all is said and done, assets under management in Fortress' hedge-fund group will fall by nearly 40% to $10.5 billion. As the hedge-fund world navigates through dire straits, Fortress' other business -- private-equity -- didn't lose any capital, but also has the luxury of long-term restrictions around its funds. No wonder they asked for their money back. |
Posted at 22/12/2008 09:08 by wetdream but not 'When' in 2009!However, useful tie up with Sinclair. Looks like TS's having to work hard to get decent content for the January investor presentation. |
Posted at 04/8/2008 07:38 by smelleroo Dermatology specialist York offers investors a safer havenPharmaceutical companies have been going through the wringer in recent years as the search for new blockbuster drugs has yielded little that can be considered fruitful, while the generics firms have started to eat away at existing patents. However, to the average terrified investor, the sector now offers something of a safe haven, away from the horrors of the retail and financial markets, to name just a couple. That is maybe why investors were happy to stump up the cash for the Aim-listed dermatology group York Pharma when it said last month that it wanted £3.9m to help buy Flammazine and Flammacerium, two dermatology and wound-care products developed by Solvay Pharmaceuticals. The placing was completed last Friday, and the total cost of the deal is 28.5m (£18.5m). A lot of smaller pharmaceutical groups have struggled to get investors interested in recent years, especially as the majority tend to raise huge amounts of money for early stage trials only to get the whole thing wrong, burning the fingers of subsequently reluctant backers. York, which was only formed in 2003, seems to have avoided these pitfalls so far: good news for a company that has ambitions to break into the global $10bn ($5.1bn) dermatology market. |
Posted at 12/5/2008 07:39 by smelleroo FT REPORT - FUND MANAGEMENT: Biotech outflows belie industry hypeBy Steve Johnson Published: May 12, 2008 Biotechnology is hailed as the industry of the future on an impressively regular basis. Biotech was caught up in the euphoria of the fin-de-siècle technology boom. When that died away, the completion of the human genome project in 2003 offered the prospect of an era of personalised medical care. Since then, the well-publicised failure of the world's pharmaceutical titans to develop suitably robust proprietary drug pipelines has prompted speculation they would instead take the easy route and vacuum up the fruits of biotech companies' labours, if not swallow entire biotech outfits outright. And all of this has occurred against a backdrop of ageing populations and a concomitant rise in healthcare spending. But whatever the merits or otherwise of these arguments, few investors appear to be listening. Across Europe, biotech funds have seen their assets under management shrivel from 12.15bn (£9.5bn, $18.7bn) at the end of 2001 to just 3.17bn as of February, according to data from Lipper Feri. Net outflows jumped to 911m last year, the worst showing since 2002, and a rash of closures has seen the range of funds ploughing this furrow narrow from 59 in 2002 to just 46. In the US, by some distance the world's pre-eminent biotech market, sentiment is no better. Healthcare and biotech funds suffered net outflows of $6.4bn (£3.2bn, 4.1bn) in 2006, $5.4bn in 2007 and $633m in the first quarter of 2008, according to EPFR Global, although remaining assets under management are healthier at $55bn. Many of those involved in the industry seem resigned to this apparent disconnect. Paul Cuddon, biotech analyst at broker KBC Peel Hunt said in a refreshingly honest research report in January that stronger returns could probably be achieved at lower risk elsewhere. "We believe investors should invest their cash in alternative sectors," he concluded. Zhining Xu, an analyst at Seymour Pierce, confessed that last year had been a "disaster for biotechnology in the UK," with the broker's own Drug Discovery index underperforming the wider market by 36.1 per cent. Fund managers are equally downcast. Andrew Baker, chairman of the International Biotech Trust, warned of the "indiscriminate selling of biotech stocks" in the fund's half-yearly report last month, while Andy Smith, manager of the Axa Framlington Biotech fund, accepts that "attention has waned from biotech, particularly in the UK and continental Europe". Interestingly, Mr Cuddon is now more upbeat about the biotech sector than in January, but only because valuations have fallen so far in the intervening months. "We have gone from a negative to a neutral stance. A lot of the companies we were negative on have fallen and fallen significantly," he says, citing typical slides of 20 per cent. "The first half of 2008 has been appalling. So many companies have been failing late stage trials, which doesn't do anything for investor sentiment." The underlying performance of biotech stocks has not been especially poor. In the US, the Nasdaq Biotech has eked out small gains every year since 2003, although it has lost 3.6 per cent so far this year. In the UK, the FTSE Techmark Mediscience index has delivered identical returns to the All Share index since the lows of 2003. European biotech funds have also delivered positive returns every year since 2003, according to Lipper, save for 2006, when they lost 5.8 per cent, and the first four months of this year, when they fell 4.7 per cent. But investors are losing faith. Sector commentators point to a toxic mix of new drugs increasingly failing at late-stage trials, and a perceived tougher line from the US Food and Drug Administration, the gatekeeper to the world's most lucrative healthcare market. "Regulatory approval is becoming harder to get from FDA and the diseases, such as cancer, are more difficult to treat," says Mr Xu. "Gene and cell therapies are too novel and the FDA is too nervous to approve them in the short term." Axa's Mr Smith paints a similar picture. "There have been some absolute disasters with drugs not approved or drugs not working," he says. "A lot of companies are close to running out of cash and that was not what investors signed up for in the first place. They thought 'let's help develop a life-saving drug and make a bit of money at the same time'. "Investors really need to see a demonstration of regulatory and commercial success." Mr Cuddon also cites a rash of late-stage failures at UK biotechs such as Renovo and Amarin, arguing: "We need a couple of success stories to prove they are doing great science and can be successful." He sees the problems in the UK market, where most participants are small, as particularly acute. "It takes 10-13 years to get from an idea to actually having a product and very few companies have completed that process in the full view of public investors." Instead, companies with valuable intellectual property get acquired by larger foreign rivals, generating a one-off payment for shareholders but denying them access to long-term revenue streams from a blockbuster drug. "Until this ends, a lot of people won't invest in UK biotech any more. The number of funds has gone down hugely. It's a shame to regard success as being acquired by a foreign company but it costs £50m to fund a Phase III trial. and I don't think people are confident enough in biotech to fund that." Montreal-based Michael Sjöström, who manages $3bn in biotech funds for Pictet, says emerging markets and commodities have taken attention away from biotech in recent years, although he reports modest inflows since the credit crunch. But at least "it is somewhat easier to find investment opportunities when everyone else is not scrambling for the next breakthrough." But hope has not been entirely extinguished. "The market will turn," asserts Mr Xu. "It is and will always be a very risky sector." Mr Smith believes any takeover of a large biotech outfit such as Amgen of the US could "light the blue touchpaper", prompting share prices to "rocket". "If pharmaceutical companies want new products they have to get them from biotech companies," he states. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
