The 'make a deal' fallacy | SGMO Message Board Posts

Sangamo Therapeutics, Inc.

  SGMO website

SGMO   /  Message Board  /  Read Message

 

 






Keyword
Subject
Between
and
Rec'd By
Authored By
Minimum Recs
  
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board
Msg  135174 of 136458  at  10/21/2019 8:24:06 PM  by

ericseb1

The following message was updated on 10/21/2019 8:25:25 PM.

 In response to msg 135172 by  ericseb1
view thread

Re: The 'make a deal' fallacy

Here is a copy of a post I made back in September where Sandy alluded to preferring “transformative” deals.

————
Post by ericseb1 on 9/10/2019

Sandy was asked ystday about partnerships, this was the latter part of his answer...

"We like the idea of partnerships as being transformative for the company. It's better to work with fewer partners than many. At the end of this year, the Pfizer deals for C9orf and for hemophilia A will move into Pfizer's world. And thalassemia and sickle move into Sanofi's. We will continue our Gilead relationship.

We need to do partnerships as a way of generating revenue as well. And there are many people, and even the few years I've been here, that have warmed to the idea of gene therapy as something that pharma companies should be involved in. They're there for gene therapy. They're almost there for gene editing and Sangamo is one of the few companies that offer some of the whole range of platforms. And so it's a very exciting time."


My comments:

1) Sandy doesn't seem interested in starting a whole new BP relationship. Less partners the better. This makes sense on so many levels. And adds support to idea that next big collaboration will likely be with Pfizer.

2) Sandy says prefer partnership to be 'transformative'. Interesting comment. ALS deal wasn't transformative. Hemo A was just one indication, not necessarily transformative. BT and SCD are piecemeal too. This sounds to me like next deal will likely be robust and impactful, as we have been speculating.

3) Sandy acknowledges that revenue from partnerships is quite important to SGMO, and quickly transitions right into discussion of how 'people' are suddenly embracing the value GT brings to a BP pipeline, and GE is on verge of being coveted asset too.

Seems like a tell to me. To paraphrase, he is saying... "Generating cash flow from partnerships at this stage continues to be critical for our l-term survival, oh and btw, BP loves gene therapy (wink wink), and pretty sure they're 'almost there' for gene editing" (wink wink).

4) Our work in identifying ALS ZFP-TF must be almost done, and IND likely not far away, since handoff to PFE should be done by EOY. “


     e-mail to a friend      printer-friendly     add to library      
| More
Recs: 8     Views: 248
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board


About Us  •  Contact Us  •  Follow Us on Twitter  •  Members Directory  •  Help Center  •  Advertise
Not a member yet? What are you waiting for? Create Account
Want to contribute? Support InvestorVillage by donating
© 2003-2019 Investorvillage.com. All rights reserved. User Agreement
   
Financial Market Data provided by
.


Loading...