The proposed PacBio-ILMN Merger remains an interesting spectator sport, with the UK's CMA looking for public input for the next round. I don't usually pay attention to stock prices, but PacBio's current state presents too juicy a situations. Just to be clear though: I do not hold any individual stock position in PacBio or Illumina (the bulk of my investing is in broad mutual funds, some of which certainly have bits of these companies).
Sunday, August 11, 2019
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
As part two of a yet-to-be-determined number of pieces on the UK's CMA preliminary analysis of the proposed Pacific Biosciences acquisition by Illumina, I'd like to briefly explore the surprising authority of this agency to plumb internal documents at the two companies.
Sunday, July 21, 2019
UK CMA's Write-up of PacBio Acquisition by Illumina Makes for XXX Reading; Clearly They Believe XXX and XXX
After writing my two recent pieces on the business side of the long read industry I planned, after a recent extended family vacation, to try to get back to science. Particularly after my chagrin when various correspondents pointed out a fact from each I should have found and didn't: in my ONT piece I failed to discover that ONT has two share classes and the Woodford fund's shares cannot be used to gain control of the company and in the PacBio piece that there is a $100M breakup fee due PacBio if for any reason the deal doesn't go thru. I'm particularly red faced on that one, as a breakup fee would play importantly into PacBio's financial health should the deal go south; $100M would buy perhaps two quarters time.
But then a bunch of people threw my way the UK Competition and Mergers Authority (CMA) report on the merger and I foolishly opened the document. It makes for interesting reading, but that is hampered by the fact it is highly redacted -- like my title. Reserving the right to comment on the contents substance at a future date (or never), I'd just like to give a tour around some of the redactions.
Monday, July 01, 2019
When Illumina announced its proposed acquisition of Pacific Biosciences last fall, an immediate question arose as to whether the deal would pass antitrust review. Illumina must have been optimistic, as they originally expected the deal to close in "mid-2019". That timetable has now been rolled back to late 2019 in the face of the UK agency with jurisdiction over mergers deciding to go for a second round of review and no word yet from the U.S.'s Federal Trade Commission.
Tuesday, June 18, 2019
There's an unfortunate chain of events that may end up causing a headache for Oxford Nanopore, and it's completely outside their control. One of the their key investors has just had his luck - or perhaps more critically his reputation -- at stock picking disintegrate. Because of some unusual choices, that has potential repercussions for ONT.
Thursday, May 30, 2019
I noted in my roundup of Oxford Nanopore technical announcements that I loved the Plongle concept. This is really both a new application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) and using it to build a 96-well sequencer. Let me expand on what there is to love.
In the coverage of ONT's announcements at London Calling, I specifically left out one of Clive's Skunk Works projects. This would be a device to use nanopores to write digital information. I'll give him points for creativity, but the reason I held this for here is I truly and sincerely hate the concept and didn't want my vitriol to distract within the other piece. But here I will let loose.
Wednesday, May 29, 2019
The annual big Clive Brown London Calling talk had a twist this year Brown introduced a set of senior lieutenants at Oxford Nanopore and then tacked on a few "and one more thing" moments at the end. If you're looking for the TL;DR version from me, it is that there were a lot of sensible but non-Earth shattering updates from the team followed by Clive updating on one prior crazy idea and throwing out two more -- one of which I love and the other I believe should be thrown out posthaste.