Hey @vanzandt your stock $BLUE got some FDA approval on the 26th of march, you think probably can do a run, it worth to watch. -Bristol Myers Squibb (NYSE: BMY) and bluebird bio, Inc. (Nasdaq: BLUE) today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Abecma (idecabtagene vicleucel; ide-cel) as the first B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell immunotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after four or more prior lines of therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. Abecma is a personalized immune cell therapy approved as a one-time infusion with a recommended dose range of 300 to 460 x 106 CAR-positive T cells.1 As an anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy, Abecma recognizes and binds to BCMA, a protein that is nearly universally expressed on cancer cells in multiple myeloma, leading to the death of BCMA-expressing cells.2 Please see the Important Safety Information section below, including Boxed WARNINGS for Abecma regarding Cytokine Release Syndrome (CRS), Neurologic Toxicities (NT), Hemophagocytic Lymphohistiocytosis/Macrophage Activation Syndrome (HLH/MAS), and Prolonged Cytopenia.
Lookin good pre-market. Up 8.3% on a little volume. Gummy of The Week/Gummy For April $PSTH $4.8B Marketcap. 200MM Shares in the float AND outstanding No debt. $24/share book value. Now what could Ackman buy for $4.8B and a little leverage? hmmmm. We will probably IPO Starlink, but only several years in the future when revenue growth is smooth & predictable. Public market does *not* like erratic cash flow haha. I'm a huge fan of small retail investors. Will make sure they get top priority. You can hold me to it. -- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 28, 2020 Once we can predict cash flow reasonably well, Starlink will IPO -- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 9, 2021 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Ackman Praises & Has 'Enormous Respect' For Tesla’s Elon Musk April 29, 2020 Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman lauded Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk in the latest episode of The Knowledge Project podcast. The Pershing Square Capital boss said he admires people like Elon Musk Billionaire investor Bill Ackman praised Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk during the launch of The Knowledge Project'spodcast, published on Tuesday. "I admire people like Elon Musk, I admire people who take on unbelievable challenges and succeed," the Pershing Square Capital boss told host Shane Parrish. "He's someone I have enormous respect for." "The notion of building a car company to compete with the big car companies is something that on its own is fairly remarkable," Ackman continued. He also noted that running an automobile company and a company that launches rockets into space at the same time impresses him and is remarkable. "If you do that a time when you're building a company to launch rockets into space I think it's even more remarkable," said Ackman. Tesla Roadster loaded in SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket He also spoke about short sellers and their influence. Ackman never invested in Tesla, but he is well aware that the behavior of short sellers goes beyond the pale. Pershing executive blamed them of going too far in their efforts to tank the electric-car maker's stock price. "I do think some of the short-sellers went beyond the role of identifying overvaluation in their attempts to actually harm a company." Ackman said. "That's where I think it goes beyond the pale."
A Conversation with Bill Ackman https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2021/02/16/a-conversation-with-bill-ackman/ BILL ACKMAN (BA): To see the problem with SPACs, you just need to look at Churchill Capital Corp. III, which did the largest SPAC deal of all time through a merger with MultiPlan, a Hellman & Friedman-controlled company. That deal closed a little over a month ago, and the stock of MultiPlan is now trading at six and a quarter, which means that the investors have lost about 37% of their money and the sponsor has made several hundred million dollars. I think that when those kind of dichotomies happen, there’s going to be a lot more scrutiny on the structure, and you have the example of the well-publicized Nikola SPAC, where there have been some allegations of fraud. With Pershing Square Tontine Holdings, we said look, we like the idea of a SPAC but we hate the structure; we don’t think the terms make sense for investors. We approached this not from the perspective of getting additional assets we could charge for or promote, or getting founder’s stock. We approached this with the thought that this is a really interesting time in history to buy a large minority stake in a private company, and there are more large-cap private companies than ever before. Why? Because of the growth of private equity. Because of the very significant number of venture-backed businesses that stayed private for a very long time because of the ability to raise capital from funds like SoftBank. Because of the family-controlled businesses that have, just by compounding since the financial crisis, grown enormously in value. Then you have the proliferation of companies that want to spin off divisions, where a SPAC could be a very interesting reverse Morris trust execution. We thought, there’s a huge universe of potential targets, and if we could create the most investor-friendly SPAC then we could raise as much money as we want, and if we could create the most merger-friendly SPAC, we only need to find one of these companies and hopefully we can buy a great business at an attractive price where everyone wins. That was the thinking. In a typical SPAC, you’ve got a sponsor that puts up a few million dollars, a forward purchaser that puts up $50 or $100 million and investors who buy stock in the IPO. Once they find a target, the sponsor ties it up. Because the capital can redeem, they have to run around and find so-called PIPE capital, so they tie up some PIPE capital, announce the transaction and hope that the public investors stay. That’s a very awkward process to try to do a deal. Our thinking was, how do we design a structure for the right investors who want to own the company, as opposed to arbitrageurs? How do we incentivize them to make it a really attractive deal? And how do we eliminate the bad incentives? So, our structure works as follows. We maintain the same ratio of warrants to shares: for every share you buy, you get a third of a warrant. Therefore, for nine shares, you get three warrants. Unlike other SPACs, we don’t give you all three warrants upfront; we give you one warrant, or 1/9 of a warrant for each share. It’s only after we’ve announced the deal and the opportunity to redeem your capital has expired that you get the additional two warrants. If you redeem, you forfeit the warrants. For the investors who stay, there is a fixed pool of warrants that gets divided among those people. So we reward loyalty and punish, if you will, redemption or disloyalty. What’s interesting about that structure is that every share always trades with 2/9 of a warrant. This means that once we announce a transaction, we expect the stock to trade up significantly because we’re going to do a good deal, of course. The stock will trade up even more because the stock will trade with 2/9 of a warrant per share. Our warrants today are trading at $7.27, meaning 2/9 of a warrant therefore are worth about $1.60 or $1.65 prior to the announcement of a deal. When we announce a deal, the warrants go live and they’ll be worth $8-$10. 2/9 of a warrant will be worth a couple bucks. With a stock with an IPO price of $20 plus warrants that are worth $2, if the stock doesn’t trade up at all in the deal, the package would be worth more than $20. As long as the stock trades for more than $20, no one will redeem from our structure. And because through redemption they only get $20, in order to get the value of the warrants they have to either stay in the deal or they have to sell to someone who exits. And I can actually pull up a PowerPoint or a presentation and walk you through this. We’ve designed a structure in which the $4 billion we’ve raised will actually be there, meaning we don’t need PIPE capital. Because there’s no separation between the sponsor and the forward purchaser—those two entities are the Pershing Square funds of which I personally am the largest shareholder—we fixed the alignment problem. And by committing a minimum $1 billion in capital by having this tontine warrant structure, we now have a $5 billion equity check that we can deploy. We also negotiated the underwriting fees from five and a half points to 1.9%. And we pay the underwriting fees with the purchase of a warrant [from the company]. The only economic difference between us and public shareholders is that we purchased a warrant at the time of the IPO, which we paid fair market value for. And then we took the proceeds, $68 million dollars, we paid off two-thirds of the underwriting cost. So our structure is $5 billion of equity, there’s only $30 million of frictional costs, and as a result it’s the most investor-friendly structure in the market. This construct was very appealing to investors—we had $12 billion of demand by the second day of the roadshow. So we were able to pick and choose our investors, which include the most important sovereign wealth funds, community pension plans, state plans, 50 billionaire family offices, from Saudi Arabia, U.S., Switzerland and all over the world. We think companies will care about who their shareholders are, and this is sort of a unique opportunity to pick up a collection of the best investors in the world as your shareholder base. So, a long-winded answer. It’s got a lot of features. The simple story is that we have the largest SPAC, the most efficient structure, the most investor-aligned entity and the ability to deploy $5 billion of capital to take a minority stake in a company and take it public.
i like this idea. i've been feeling that spacs, now that you can get them at a lower cost, make sense as long as it's right before the announcement or merge. you'll either get a small bump that lets you sell unscathed, or you may just do really well. van--is it the feeling that they'll announce soonish?
- NY cannabis bill 'big win' for Acreage and Curaleaf, says Alliance Global » Foley & Paysafe is on Cramer tonight!!
Guys I've been doing football stuff all morning what's up with this Credit Suiss Nomera thing? Goldman Sachs and discounted China names... Discovery far fetch Viacom... Some firm blew up...... Arkgagos???? Highly levered book swaps... This does not sound good. Material losses... Why why is so important to make money!!! These Fing criminals. Another firm TIGER> Tiger based they have tipped the apple cart //can they be trusted // I don't like this... is this an attack from China? > CURLF BFT