Amarin Corp PLC (AMRN) Opciones

2. WHAT is going on in Europe?? How are revenues flat/down from Q3 to Q4? That seems illogical. Is this again some sort of timing issue, and Q1 will look great?

Regardless that the numbers from the EU are somehow affected by timing or other factors, it is still rather depressing looking at the uptake. Mind you, we don't have the 2 biggies - France and Germany - so that factors into it. But, my molasses in winter seems to move faster. What is the most frustrating for me (and possibly other old timers) is that I can remember management (not this current crew) talk about how Europe was a multi-billion dollar opportunity. There must have been a reason why the market, even back in the glory days, did not factor that story into the market cap.

Volume!? ... did someone say something about volume?

Yup,
Volume interaction with overhead resistance has governed price direction.
Once again, while you all were speculating on announcements, earnings, etc., I was demonstrating how Volume interaction with overhead resistance has governed price direction. Once again, this time is no different. Though the news that broke of a R/S was bad, TA had already forecasted the price outcome.



Now there is a new ice line and it is exerting some real suppressive pressure. Take a look at all the above average buy volume on the heels of the announcement, yet prices are stuck in concrete below the ice. They call that, "big effort, no reward," and it portends a test of the low and likely new lower lows for the PPS.

"Dire Straits" ...
The phrase "dire straits" comes from the nautical term "straits," which refers to a narrow passage of water, often associated with dangerous or turbulent conditions.
This couldn't be a better description of both the chart and the company's prospects.

https://stocktwits.com/SanDiegoLiving/message/608318448

Another buying opportunity right ?

Hilarious 39 pennies and they still think its going to go you really cant make this stuff up lol

Good article, sleven. The article brought back memories of one trial I participated in that involved the issue of inventorship-- who invented the subject matter claimed in plaintiff's patent? The inventor named in plaintiff's patent was dead at date of actual trial, so much earlier deposition testimony of that inventor was read into the record by other persons in a Q and A method. No live testimony from the plaintiff's named inventor. The jury slept during that reading of deposition testimony. 
The defendant infringer had the benefit of live testimony of a person that the PTO Board of Patent Interferences had determined (erroneously, I thought) was the actual first and only inventor of the patent's claimed subject matter. Suffice to say that the defendant's inventor candidate did not survive cross-examination very well, but in the jury's eyes prevailed as first, and only, inventor. In a post trial interview, the jury foreman said   "We thought the PTO got it right."

Larrybirdlegend are you still holding? Or did you bail?

It always seems to be a crapshoot when it comes to the legal avenue. The article Sleven posted which offered up the idea that it might be better for defendants to not use the patent invalidity defense, had a lot of ifs, maybe, possibly, and hedging that such decisions must be made on a case by case basis. Most of it related to jury trials, whereas you point out a trial with ruling by the judge. Hard to say. What is funny to me, is that you have the United States Patent Office which studies and grants these patents, and then we have a bunch of yokels - a good portion of which think the Sun revolves around the Earth and couldn't give you the cube root of 27, deciding which patents are valid or not.

I hope you're right because that defense played perfectly with Judge Du. 

Nuke, Good movie. Sad to see Hackman go. Invalidity defense is fairly common. One of the asserted patents is on loan from Mochida. It's based on jellis. Don't see how you can crack that one.
Sleven,

That makes me feel relieved. Sounds like Hikma's pretty desperate to pull a stunt like that. As long as Gene Hackman doesn't do any jury tampering. Great movie; "Runaway Jury" starring Dustin Hoffman, Gene Hackman and John Cusack

XBL, keep in mind, NOL carry forwards in an acquisition are not as straightforward as you illustrate.
There are limitations in many cases, plus you need to apply a DCF calculation to the projected application of the carry forwards (NPV).
In addition, remember that Amarin is Irish, and the acquirer may not be Irish or U.S. based. For example,  Novartis is Swiss. And they have lower tax rate and less favorable tax rules on NOL carry forwards.

RMB,
https://www.quinnemanuel.com/the-firm/publications/march-2021-noted-with-interest-lessons-from-trial-potential-upsides-to-foregoing-invalidity-defenses-as-an-accused-infringer/
Not overestimating. Actually the opposite.
Sleven,

You are most likely correct, but having been on 2 juries (one of which was a murder trial), I will never overestimate the intelligence of a jury.

It’s Novartis (not NOVO).

https://stocktwits.com/SanDiegoLiving/message/608232666

Nuke, Hikma is attacking the validity of tha CVD patents asserted in the lawsuit. It's a belt and suspenders defense. We didn't infringe the patents, but if we did it doesn't matter because they aren't valid. I don't think that will play well with a jury.
Sleven,

It seems to have problems with apostrophe and multiple spaces

Are we all developing the same fat thumb when we post messages? I notice a very similar conglomeration of type characters entering the beginning or ending of sentences. Those type characters were not there when I hit done or post. I think I-Hub has developed a problem with certain typewriter keys

Not anarchy, Nuke. It's the way the patent system and any attendant litigation has always worked since the 1952 Patent Act revised the much earlier Acts in early and mid 1800s. Different patents have different claims directed to different respective inventions to which different/same prior art may or may not be applicable. 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103. Other defenses against patent validity exist, e.g., those set forth in 35 U.S.C.101 and 112.  Court trials or PTO reexaminations(with subsequent appeals to CAFC) determine the patentability/validity results in new cases, along with Court-determined infringement results.

In a typical RS, companies have to get shareholder approval and the process might actuall be longer.  AI:
"After a company receives shareholder approval for a reverse stock split, the process typically takes a few months, with the reverse stock split becoming effective after the company notifies Nasdaq (or the relevant exchange) at least 10 calendar days in advance, and after the new CUSIP is DTC-eligible. [https://www.honigman.com/media/alert/3229_Public Company Alert 4.5.pdf, https://www.hoganlovells.com/en/publications/sec-approves-nasdaq-and-nyse-revisions-to-reverse-stock-split-rules-what-public-companies-need-to-know#:~:text=Nasdaq requires evidence that the new CUSIP,10-calendar-day notification requirement to avoid potential delays., https://www.klgates.com/The-State-of-Play-for-Reverse-Stock-Splits-by-Nasdaq-and-NYSE-Listed-Issuers-1-23-2025] "

Generative AI is experimental.[1] https://www.honigman.com/media/alert/3229_Public Company Alert 4.5.pdf[2] https://www.hoganlovells.com/en/publications/sec-approves-nasdaq-and-nyse-revisions-to-reverse-stock-split-rules-what-public-companies-need-to-know#:~:text=Nasdaq requires evidence that the new CUSIP,10-calendar-day notification requirement to avoid potential delays.[3] https://www.klgates.com/The-State-of-Play-for-Reverse-Stock-Splits-by-Nasdaq-and-NYSE-Listed-Issuers-1-23-2025
In

Xblkbk, the 30 day wait to effect the RS also struck me as not typical in a RS. My initial thinking was that it might have to do with the ratio adjustment of the ADS’s, maybe some regulatory requirement. Good overall analysis. Thanks.

FWIW. Some calculations and RS thoughts
(Calculations use numbers just reported, 411M shares outstanding, and 1:20 RS effective April 11th):
Cash: $294.2M =  $0.716/shr.  $14.32
Value of Tax Loss Carryforwards:Accrued loss 1,668,546,000 at a 20% tax rate= $333.7M.  $0.812/shr.  $16.24
Revenue Runrate;4Q24 $62.3M  Annualized $249.2MAt 1x rev.  $0.61/shr.   $12.13(Note, acquisitions use a multiple of PEAK revenues, typically 3x)
Given the above, with the stock at $0.41 or $8.20, it is significantly undervalued. 
An acquirer would also take into consideration the new LR-EtEPA formulation. No way to quantify the value without knowledge of FDA trial requirements, patent length...
Another consideration is the value to the acquirer's drug portfolio. This is where I concur with SanDiegoLiving on Stocktwits, Vascepa is a perfect fit for Novo, given Entresto off patent 7/15/2025, and combo therapy potential with both their PCSK-9 (Inclisiran) and their GLP-1 offerings. It will be very interesting to see the data on their in vitro GLP-1/Vascepa combo. 
Given the stock price and delisting timeframe, a Reverse Split was inevitable. I think there were 2 main reasons for 1:20. First, it shrinks the float to roughly 20M, making an all stock acquisition much more palatable for the acquirer. More importantly, it puts the post split price firmly above $5. Many mutual fund bylaws have minimum price guidelines at $5. As a penny stock, AMRN is not on institutional radar, it doesn't meet the criteria in their stock screening algorithms. That will change post split. 
Most RS occur shortly after announcement. So why is ours taking nearly a month? Is it to provide time for the news to permeate through the institutional investor community, and provide time to do their homework and be ready on April 11, 2025 ??

Thanks, DMC8. That man/woman upbeat talk show about Amarin's R&D, prospective revenue growth domestically and internationally( particularly in Europe), and presently extant generic competition in the United States was pleasant to listen to for a change. Fits perfectly into further investment ideas I had for putting remaining cash spouse and I have in respective brokerage accounts from various sources, including dividends. The cash from buyout of Avid(CDMO: 52k shares at $12.50/share) was less than desirable but still a substantial LTCG in early February. A hunk remains for further investments and any tax payments after new and carry forward LTCLs are factored in.

Capt.... Vascepa is maximally effective when taken 1 gram 4 times daily....A statin plus MK- 0616 plus Lr-Et-EPA may only need to be taken once a day orally for maximum effectiveness.

MERCK: A potential suitor for $AMRN ? We are beginning to understand the MOA’s for VASCEPA®/VAZKEPA® lie beyond LDL-c reduction. New statin Add-On’s like PCSK-9 inhibitors have proven to be effective in reducing LDL-c levels as well as reductions in CVE’s. Evolocumab and Alirocumab are examples of these injectable Add-On’s. We know that IPE works independently and complementary to LDL-c lowering therapies. It stands to reason that Combinations of statins + PCSK-9 inhibitors + VASCEPA®/VAZKEPA® could address the substantial residual risk for CVE’s.

A co-administered triple combo is a distinct future possibility. This is why I believe that NOVARTIS is the #1 suitor for an Amarin BO. However, their inclisiran PCSK-9 inhibitor is different from the previously mentioned PCSK-9’s. It’s siRNA technology that may not be possible to replicate in a oral product.

MERCK, on the other hand, is developing an oral PCSK-9 (MK-0616) that may be possible as a fixed dose triple combination.
It’s the EPA Stupid!

Gentlemen, Okay, I give up. I thought the Hikma trial was about "Infringement?" So, how could Hikma be bringing up a case that was already decided in another court (DU)? I thought Amarin's Anchor Patents had already stood up in court? And that the Marine Patents were the ones overruled? From my one jury trial experience, we the jury could not ask questions about previous judgements or speculate about something that was not formally being presented at the trial. If we're being challenged again about our Patents this is a real travesty of our court system. "Anyone at anytime can sue anyone with anything?" This has to stop, this is anarchy.

LM, Appreciate your explanation of the process
with regard to patents. My opinion is that NVS would
have a much better shot at securing these patents than
would AMRN in a continued go it alone mode for Europe.
I really hope that Denner has a game plan he is following
that will lead to a BP BO. My fear is that he will wait to long
and lose the best opportunities for a sale at a good value.
The sooner a BP acquires AMTN the greater the time frame
they will have to expand sales and reap the benefits. I also
wonder if Denner is using the "new EPA formulations" as bait
for BP interest. AMRN does not discuss this for competitive
reasons so we have no way to gage how Denner sees it.

Cad,Yes I do realize the R/S and what $100 equates to after April 11. Sarcasm was intentional. 
Noel

Not sure who that lady talking is but she is impressed with Q4 EU revenue. 4 million dollars - up from 2.5 million a year ago.

She fails to mention that Q3 EU revenue came in at 4.3 million. I am sure that it hasn't really fallen from Q3 to Q4 (must some thing related to when things are booked or whatever) but I wouldn't be touting the 4 million number as something to be very proud of. Let's hope Novartis is in the wings.

He certainly didn’t mean via a R/S which equates your $100 post to essentially a $5.00 price today. You do realize that our new math model isn’t what he was talking about? We’d need $2000 pps to get to = his lofty projection

https://stocktwits.com/SanDiegoLiving/message/608194642

North, From what I just read, it looks like patent invalidity is an argument presented to the jury. A back up defense.
Sleven,

God rest his soul and may his words be proven right all in due time.

North, Patent validity is part of the Hikma defense. Wouldn't a determination of that be required before the jury trial proceeds?
Sleven,

I believe Biobill once said this would sell for no less than $100. Well, I think he will be proven right. RIP Jason

Ahhh, the harbinger of truth speaks. These "generics" are MFers. 

I know a stock that has $15 per share with no debt and will be trading at $8.20 at current prices in a few weeks. Find me another one with at least 250m in revenue selling with those numbers.

If patent validity remains as an issue, then how can their be any final judgment favorable to Amarin?

Thanks Laurent for all that DD

Could, regarding exclusivity protection till 2039, it's not quite guaranteed yet, and will depend largely on the opposition proceedings ongoing right now: https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP22171033&lng=en&tab=doclist (generics filed an opposition on 01/24/2025 this year).

We do have a patent that survived the opposition phase, that confers protection till June 2033: https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP17206714&lng=en&tab=doclist For this 2033 patent, there is an Appeal hearing scheduled for Oct 31st, where generics will try to get the Appeal board to overturn Amarin's opposition division win. I think this Appeal hearing is absolutely critical for gauging how strong our European protection will be, and how strong our patents are. Around June/July of this year, the three member Appeal board will issue a non-binding preliminary opinion, so we'll get a better sense of how this might play out then.

Ideally, a buyer like Novartis would want the 2039 patent completely defend the Opposition and subsequent Appeal, but that would likely take at least 3 years. I think the 2033 patent could serve as a proxy/litmus test (as well as being valuable runway protection in its own right).

Could, of course as far as the EU goes (and most likely ROW) only a BP will be able to garner sales worth mentioning. 4 million is not worth even mentioning after all this time. But that also brings to mind the catch wrt a potential takeover. Amarin will never be able (in at least some reasonable timetable) to drive revenue in the EU to the point where it increases valuation appreciable to get an appetizing offer. A potential acquirer will say "we will have to do all the work to get sales up so why should we pay you what you want". That will be the negotiating dynamic. As you say, the longer this goes, the weaker the BO offer so it is pointless to waste time and Denner et al should get their butts in gear.

Not too cognizant wrt this stuff but I assume BP can get a handle on the EU and ROW potential and estimate a value, and I wonder if the U.S. situation could be handled with a CVR?

Most disturbing are the pathetic sales numbers out
of Europe. Management always brings up that the
potential market is huge and the exclusivity protection
is to 2039. My opinion has always been that only a
BP BO will change this dynamic. Certainly Denner
must understand this. I hope that SDL is correct in
what he has put together. Each year that goes by
without a BP BO seems to weaken the BO value,
not strengthen it. Will that change? Can the new
formulations be a game changer? Only Denner
may know the answer. Right now the best clue we
might have is Sarissa buying more stock and the buyback
actually being launched. Until then we may be DITW.

Thanks will do.

North, No. Hikma is still using invalidity as part of the defense.
Sleven,

That's the other shoe that will drop just like they did in the previous MARINE Patents trial. Only this time we hope our counsel will be ready for schenanegans like cropped tables. 

A settlement is not a rational strategy.

If a pre trial settlement serves Denner's near term interests, there will be a settlement. End of story. Amarin quit being a "rational company" when it became a hedge fun play thing under full control by Denner and his merry Board of pirates.

I don't know DMC? We seen our share of cheerleaders on this thread for sure. Probably most of us at one point or another. It's great to keep on the positive side. Too many unknowns at this point. The courts are the biggest hurdle I see. Then what about France and Germany? France hasn't adopted Inclisiran? Too expensive perhaps? Vascepa although not cheap it's acceptance is slow. I'm holding off and waiting. Not getting too excited about getting bought out, especially not June 2025. 

Did Hikma drop its patent invalidity contentions, or did Hikma make no such contentions in their Answer to any Complaint filed by Amarin?