Where are the phase IIb results for Bimatoprost?

[It's2014ComeOnAlready]

The bottom line is that we still have no idea as to the efficacy of bimatoprost for hair growth. If things were great, Actavis is likely to have swiftly moved forward with Phase 3 as it has done with several other of its properties. Speculation by 2014 that Actavis is staying quiet BECAUSE bimatoprost is a known success is almost assuredly wrong. Companies do not offer press releases for failed products. They stay quiet until they announce their pipeline on a going forward basis (something Actavis said it plans to do during its next R&D day), and the products that don't make the cut are silently dropped. Thus, silence does not = success.

Now, I'm not saying bimatoprost has failed. I really have no idea. It may or may not be one of the many clinical programs Actavis hopes to push forward in the relatively near term. But we know that it is not currently in Phase 3, and we also know that it could be a long time before we are made aware of success/failure. All I want to say is that the business analysis (not necessarily the scientific analysis, which I think is generally sound) taking place on this forum is too highly speculative, in my opinion. At this point, all we can really do is wait and hope that Actavis realizes the promise of bimatoprost as a clinical and commercial opportunity.

Well, that's why I finished with "that's my take." If it failed, I understand why there wouldn't be a press-release, but why not make the results public?

This is getting ridiculous, does nothing but fin and dut work for hair loss?

[StayThick]

Well, that's why I finished with "that's my take." If it failed, I understand why there wouldn't be a press-release, but why not make the results public?

This is getting ridiculous, does nothing but fin and dut work for hair loss?

Anything else work? Lol.

NO.

[It's2014ComeOnAlready]

Anything else work? Lol.

NO.

That was a rhetorical question

[StayThick]

That was a rhetorical question

And I provided you an answer to that rhetorical question. "NO." Move on.

[It's2014ComeOnAlready]

And I provided you an answer to that rhetorical question. "NO." Move on.

Then you don't understand the meaning of a rhetorical question. Moving on.

[joel203]

And I provided you an answer to that rhetorical question. "NO." Move on.

*facepalm*

[BiqqieSmalls]

I listened to the conference call this morning and was actually registered to ask a question, but they only took about 10 questions from different investors. Nothing was asked about Bim for MPB because I don't think people know about it. It was in Allergan's pipeline, not Actavis's. Could this be why Actavis is not talking about it?

I have sent an email to the VP of Investor Relations earlier today. Haven't yet received a response. I'll call her tomorrow to discuss this.

[StayThick]

Then you don't understand the meaning of a rhetorical question. Moving on.

Your anger is misguided. Came across to me as a legit question versus a rhetorical one. In which case, I gave you an answer. My sincere apologies if your question was made with a hint of sarcasm. I didn't see a point in your question...

Continue wasting time on a eye lash drug that won't make it to market and if it does is miles away from reaching actual product to your bald head. You don't even know the results of this for hairloss let alone when/if it will come to fruition.

Get mad at the lack of hairloss treatments that causes you to make such retarded rhetorical questions. There isn't a solution outside of minox/fin. Deal with it. I am.

[Keki]

Well your conclusions are wrong, prostaglanding analog works, to some people even little dose like 0.01 let hairs grows like crazy with documented pics made from docs and not aneddoctal bullshit like 95% of posts here, they can be a solution to people who cannot use minox or fin or where those treatment didn't give good results, we can discuss if can be a good product for the market even if the % of people responding to treatment are inferior to minox, or we can discuss if the cost for the 3% solution is too high for consumers but we cannot say "this doesn't work" becaose that's a lie

[Justinian]

We know Bim works, we just don't know if it works well enough to be profitable over minox. The most likely scenario is they still don't know if they will continue on with bim for alopecia. Preliminary trials would seem to indicate that extremely low doses work to some extent, so it's just a question of how much does dose matter.

Also, I've been an investor in an unrelated biotech for a year or so now, and I've learned the hard way that companies definitely aren't obligated to release trial result information to investors. It's very frustrating sometimes, but that's the way it is.