Fair observation I guess...
What would make you assume another interested 'counter-party' (eg:: BMS) hasn't already been doing their 'homework' on VLA, and perhaps increasing their stakes via subsidiaries and/or lending agreements, in anticipation of a future play..??
And from T/O experience, I've seen 'independent auditors' identify an 'offer' as 'Not Fair' but 'Reasonable' which then leaves us SH to decide whether to accept it, or VLA BoD to 'push back' on Merck, there may still be 'room to move' perse...
I know you've been in VLA for a while now, as have I, so I'm curious, what do you attribute the 'odd' trading patterns (volumes, excessive single-share trades, etc) to if it's essentially a 'done-deal'..?? Someone has to be 'buying' all of these VLA shares that have been changing hands...
The next round of results will perhaps further 'solidify' Merck's reason for their 'bid', but CA21 'combo'd'
with Vervoy had an 'outstanding' results improvement, 11% (Vervoy alone) up to +57% (CA21 combo) from memory, so as I see it, the next 'round' of results may also 'solidify/inspire' BMS (considering they've invested significant effort and $$$ running CA21 trials also) to make a 'competing' bid for a 'combo drug' they see significant value in, and one that isn't too far from 'regulatory approval', which their 'Nektar' partnership (for $1.8B), is nowhere 'approvals' near from what I understand...
Happy to be proven wrong, and again, as I see it, there seems to be very little 'downside' (perhaps only the lost opportunity costs of holding) in waiting for the 'gavel' to come down on Merck's bid, and/or waiting for a 'rival' bid...
Guess we'll see how it plays out in early April...
ML
Expand
