Re: The 'make a deal' fallacy
Been reading this board for years. I no longer participate in posting my opinions on message boards but I enjoy reading insightful, well educated, respectful posts that are often present here. Iím making this post because of the constant complaining over the lack of recent deal making. I would suggest going back and rereading the old transcripts to when Sandy first came aboard Sgmo when the SP was lingering in the $2-$3 range and what it was the company lacked and what was needed to get back into their good graces of large pharma.
To paraphrase and make this post as short as possible, large pharma has always liked and felt sgmoís science was best in class but where the company fell short was living up to the part of the collaborations. They are almost there with the Pfizer partnership but not yet and until they turn it over and have the ability to focus on the next partnered program their number 1 goal should be to fulfill all of their responsibilities and obligations through to fruition. That is what large pharma wants in a partner and that is what is needed to attract more. Until then they are still a research company with good science and not a therapeutic company making marketable products. It is vital for Sgmo to nurture these partnerships all the way through and if and when they do that more partnerships will come and so will the money. This is still a small company with limited resources. It is most important they donít get ahead of themselves and prove their worth as a competent well run company that can get the job done. They have their hands full with the collaborations they have and SGMO needs large pharma, large pharma doesnít need SGMO.
So please go back and reread the transcripts and what Sandy said about the companies short comings and what it will take to change the companies perspective. If they canít do that then they might as well sell the company and put it into the hands of someone who can.