Chris L. asks, "What's your take on the top brass at Vivus (VVUS) dumping their shares in the past week?" Smart. Opportunistic. Expected. If you own stock or options with a cost basis of $4 per share and their value rises suddenly to $22 per share, wouldn't you be selling too? I hope so. I'm not sure if this matters, but the investors who gobbled up shares of Vivus in this week's financing didn't seem to be bothered by the insider selling.
J.T. writes, "First of all, congratulations on your last two calls on Vivus and Chelsea Therapeutics (CHTP). You were spot on. Although I have disagreed with several of your articles in the past, your assessment on both companies was fair and correct. Staying in the "fair" mode, I can sometimes be overly critical, so I offer you kudos when you're right. (By the way, I was wrong on both of those.)" Thanks, J.T. You don't hear many people saying "I was wrong" these days. That's too bad. There is nothing wrong with being wrong. We all make mistakes. What's important is accountability -- acknowledging your errors, learning from them and congratulating those who get it right. I try hard to play by those rules, and I respect folks like J.T. who do the same.
JM asks, "Question regarding Celldex Therapeutics (CLDX): Stock is pretty much flat for more than a year, then in January over the course of maybe four weeks it practically doubles in value. Then company sells more shares, and stock promptly falls back to where it was before January. What gives? Is this stock manipulation?" No, it's just biotech. Remember the old biotech saw: You raise money when you can, not when you need. Celldex shares were up about 80% to 90% year to date so the company raised money opportunistically. It might suck for you if you were unlucky to buy Celldex at its recent high but the company is just playing by the biotech rulebook.
Ken B. doesn't like my FDA Drug Approval Contest: "Adam F., to quote your asinine boss, 'YOU KNOW NOTHING' and your silly contest is a meaningless and worthless exercise. Thanks for being such a reliable reverse indicator!" Haters gonna hate.
Abe L. takes umbrage over my concerns about Exelixis' ( EXEL) prostate cancer drug cabozantinib: "I will definitely be e-mailing a copy of your article today and asking the SEC to check and see what your options positions are today. Nothing but a hacket
Ted B. asks, "What is your vote on Surfaxin from Discovery Labs (DSCO) and why?" I say FDA approves Surfaxin on Tuesday. Why? The little-known FDA Mercy Rule. It's inconceivable that a company can screw up so badly that its drug is rejected five times in a row. Therefore, Surfaxin will be approved. If you want to read a contrarian take on Discovery and Surfaxin, Joseph Lee of FDATracker.com argues that FDA will reject the drug. --Written by Adam Feuerstein in Boston. >To contact the writer of this article, click here: Adam Feuerstein. >To follow the writer on Twitter, go to http://twitter.com/adamfeuerstein. >To submit a news tip, send an email to: firstname.lastname@example.org. Follow TheStreet on Twitter and become a fan on Facebook.