Sangamo reports Q1 EPS (14c) vs (27c) last year
Reports Q1 revenue $6.44M, consensus $7.42M. 'This quarter we continued to advance our promising neurology genomic medicine pipeline and are pleased to have signed our third STAC-BBB license agreement, reinforcing that Sangamo (SGMO) is a collaborator of choice for neurotropic capsids,' said Sandy Macrae, Chief Executive Officer of Sangamo Therapeutics. 'We achieved significant clinical and regulatory derisking milestones in our Fabry disease program and raised additional capital through business development and other means, to provide additional runway to secure a potential Fabry partner. With our neuropathic pain program ready to enter the clinic, we look forward to dosing the first patients with our epigenetic regulation technology, which we hope will usher in a new era in chronic pain treatment.'
Protect Your Portfolio Against Market Uncertainty
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
a day ago
- Business Insider
‘Keep an Eye on the Bigger Picture,' Says Morgan Stanley About Tesla Stock
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) stock took a sharp hit last week after Elon Musk and Donald Trump – once close buddies – turned on each other in a public social media spat that quickly became an online spectacle. While the internet grabbed its popcorn to watch the drama/comedy unfold, investors were less amused, driving the stock down and wiping out a record $152 billion in market value. Confident Investing Starts Here: Trump warned he might yank Elon's federal subsidies and contracts, while Musk took jabs at Trump's links to Jeffrey Epstein and called for his impeachment. Now, Trump says he's considering ditching his Tesla. But what does Wall Street have to say about all this madness? Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas, one of the Street's biggest TSLA bulls, shared a 'few 'pith and marrow' thoughts' in the wake of the public spat. According to Trump, the whole thing kicked off because Musk was upset his 'Big Beautiful Bill' was not beneficial to Tesla. However, Jonas makes short shrift of the implications. 'We do not believe the phasing out of EV tax credits from the BBB (Big Beautiful Bill) is material to the long term outlook for TSLA,' the analyst said While Musk's involvement with the Trump administration and his increasingly polarizing politics were the cue from a massive drop in sales for Tesla earlier this year, Jonas does not think the argument will help bring back buyers that once considered buying a Tesla but were turned off by Musk's recent activities. In fact, Jonas thinks the argument could 'potentially (temporarily) alienate multiple sides of the political spectrum.' Yet, zooming out, Jonas thinks it's important to keep an eye on the bigger picture and that offers plenty of promise. 'While emotions are running high, we are not convinced the longer-term vectors that drive the stock's value have changed here,' he said. ' AI leadership, autonomy/robotics, manufacturing, supply chain re-architecture, renewable power, critical infrastructure… Tesla still holds so many valuable cards that are largely apolitical, in our opinion.' Nevertheless, investors should prepare for a rocky ride over the near-term. Donning his 'trading cap,' Jonas feels more confident about short-term volatility than about the stock's immediate direction. The analyst says he's sticking with his $410 price target on Tesla shares, even as he braces for the stock to post further losses. That figure implies a one-year gain of 36%. Meanwhile, Jonas maintains an Overweight rating (i.e., Buy). (To watch Jonas' track record, click here) That view, however, stands in contrast to the broader Street sentiment. Based on a mix of 16 Buys, 10 Holds, and 10 Sells, the analyst consensus rates the stock a Hold (i.e., Neutral). Going by the $285.91 average target, the shares are expected stay range-bound for the foreseeable future. (See TSLA stock forecast) To find good ideas for stocks trading at attractive valuations, visit TipRanks' Best Stocks to Buy, a tool that unites all of TipRanks' equity insights.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
The Biggest Boondoggles in Trump's Big Beautiful Bill
The House reconciliation bill — officially known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — is extraordinary in how much it robs from the poor to boost the rich. Its tax cuts for the wealthy are financed by cuts to health care coverage (both in Medicaid and Obamacare) that will help Republicans swell the ranks of the uninsured by 16 million, according to the Congressional Budget Office. But the Big Beautiful Bill is not just an ugly tax bill where society's less fortunate are made to sacrifice for the benefit of the wealthiest. It's also a spending bill that steers hundreds of billions of dollars into new pet projects. This is financed with debt. All in, the BBB will spike deficits by $2.4 trillion over 10 years, according to CBO, likely increasing the national debt by $3 billion when interest payments are included. The bill's spending has angered budget hawks in the Senate like Rand Paul (R.-Ky.). It has been part of the public split between Donald Trump and Elon Musk, who calls the bill a 'disgusting abomination' that will squander any supposed savings imposed by DOGE, the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. Conservative budget analysts are sounding the alarm: 'This inability to set priorities is going to bring a debt crisis,' Jessica Riedl, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute tells Rolling Stone. In fact, the bill would create so much new debt that it risks triggering a mechanism called 'sequestration,' which would impose deep, mandatory cuts to Medicare. These cuts to the health care of America's seniors would start next year, and rise to half-a-trillion dollars over ten years. The BBB's spending provisions have received far less scrutiny than the tax cuts and safety-net slashes. But the bill lards new funds on a range of already-fat-cats — from the military-industrial complex and Big Tech to private prisons and construction concerns. Below we survey the biggest boondoggles of the Big Beautiful Bill: The BBB proposes spending nearly $50 billion for construction of Trump's border wall with Mexico. Sen. Paul, in an appearance on Face the Nation last week, accused the administration of waste. He cited an existing Customs and Border Patrol estimate that wall construction should cost only about $6.5 billion over 1,000 miles: 'They have inflated the cost of the wall eightfold,' said Paul. (After his TV hit, CPB appears to have scrubbed the construction cost estimate Paul quoted from its website.) Paul even questioned the need for more wall, at all, given his view that Trump has 'essentially stopped the border flow without new money and without new legislation.' Offering just a small taste of the anticipated building bonanza, the Trump administration awarded a $70 million, 7-mile wall-construction contract to California-based Granite Construction in March. The bill includes $45 billion for 'Adult Alien Detention Capacity' and 'Family Residential Centers.' This funding would enable the administration to ramp up its mass deportation program for undocumented immigrants. As the nation has seen from recent high-profile Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids at restaurants, this involves ripping productive members out of society and making them wards of the state, at great public cost, until they can be deported. The money would be a boon to private prison contractors and construction firms. For a taste of where this is headed, consider that the administration has already inked a 15-year, $1 billion deal with GEO Group to house ICE detainees at Delaney Hall, a 1,000 bed facility in Newark, New Jersey. The mayor of the city was arrested by ICE amid a recent protest at the facility. The private prison company is well connected to the Trump administration. As Rolling Stone has reported, Attorney General Pam Bondi is a former lobbyist for GEO Group, which also made a $500,000 donation to the Trump inaugural committee. A GEO subsidiary donated $1.3 million to a Super PAC that backed Trump's 2024 election. The BBB puts up nearly $25 billion for the Golden Dome. The satellite-based missile defense project builds off the branding of Israel's 'Iron Dome,' a ground-based defensive system that can intercept rockets and missiles launched from local militants or state actors like Iran. 'To the extent we match Iron Dome technology, we will be well protected from a missile attack from Canada or Mexico,' says Riedl of the Manhattan Institute, sarcastically. 'But not necessarily from Russia, North Korea or China.' In reality the Golden Dome appears to be Trump's revival of the Ronald Reagan era Strategic Defense Initiative, or SDI — a hugely expensive, largely ineffective space-based missile-defense system derided in the 1980s as 'Star Wars.' 'Ultimately this is $25 billion more for SDI' says Rieidl. 'This is a noble idea — but a lot of spending up until now hasn't brought a lot of success.' Trump envisions the BBB as a downpayment on a total investment of $175 million. The Golden Dome promises to be a golden goose for defense contractors. SpaceX, the rocket company founded by Trump's billionaire benefactor Elon Musk, who's currently feuding with Trump, is reportedly vying for a contract. So are the Peter Thiel-linked tech firm Palantir and longtime military-industrial heavyweights like Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. Including the Golden Dome, the Big Beautiful Bill increases America's Pentagon spending by a colossal $150 billion. 'This is a bill from the military-industrial complex advocates who are padding the military budget,' according to Paul, who has long criticized the Defense Department for failing to pass every audit to which it's been subjected. Budgets are moral documents. And metaphorically people often speak of the tradeoff between 'guns and butter' — or programs that defend the public and those that keep the public out of misery. The guns side of the Big Beautiful Bill is financed entirely by cuts to butter. The bill strips $128 billion in funding to the states for the SNAP food assistance program that keeps American families from going hungry. It also aims to avoid another $92 billion in spending by knocking people out of the program with red tape and work requirements, including for parents of argues that the Pentagon should be forced to achieve cost efficiencies before it receives any new federal dollars. 'One of DOGE's great failures was essentially ignoring the enormous waste and cost overruns inside the Pentagon. There is a reason the Defense Department cannot pass an audit. There is so much waste. It has significant cost overruns — particularly in government contracts and procurement — that absolutely must be addressed before we further increase defense spending,' says the Manhattan institute fellow. The House bill steers new money to more than a dozen weapons systems, including many dogged by cost overruns, construction delays, performance issues, and questions of combat capability. On the airplane side, this list includes: $4.5 billion for the B-21 Raider, the Air Force's newest long-range stealth bomber, which cost nearly $700 million per aircraft to produce. The two-person Northrup Gruman-built plane may be poorly suited to modern warfighting, where swarms of unmanned drones are becoming the dominant air threat. $3.2 billion for the Boeing-built F-15EX. The planes cost $90 million a pop, making them more expensive than the notoriously costly F-35A. Unlike that fighter, the F-15EX is not a stealth aircraft. And production has been snarled by manufacturing problems. A recent federal assessment put it bluntly: 'Boeing has experienced increased quality deficiencies.' Ships include: $4.6 billion for Virginia Class submarines. The nuclear submarine program has a reported cost overrun of $17 billion and has delivered boats massively behind schedule. The contractors are General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries. The Pentagon already has 23 of these submarines. $2.1 billion for San Antonio Class 'amphibious transport docks.' This ship was put on production pause in 2023 because of massive cost overruns. The boats are supposed to land Marines into onshore combat, but have been found by DOD testers to only be suitable 'in a benign environment' because the ship is 'not effective, suitable and not survivable in a combat situation.' Huntington Ingalls Industries is the contractor. The Pentagon already has 13 of these boats. More from Rolling Stone Donald Trump Is Destroying the Economy and Waging War on the Poor Trump Moves to Deploy National Guard to L.A. Over ICE Protests 'Dejected' Trump Says Relationship With Musk Is Over; Calls Him a 'Big-Time Drug Addict': Report Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Politico
3 days ago
- Politico
The Ideological Schism Fueling the Trump-Musk Fight
Amid the fallout of the messy public feud between Doland Trump and Elon Musk, it is instructive to think back to Dec. 26, 2024. That day marked the start of another intra-GOP skirmish that nearly fractured the elite core of the MAGA coalition. The December brawl — which, like the latest one, unfolded primarily online — pitted two high-profile factions of the Trumpian right against one another over the issue of high-skilled immigration. The nationalist-populist right, led by MAGA strategist Steve Bannon, urged the incoming administration to end the H-1B visa program as part of a broader crackdown on immigration. The so-called tech right, led by Musk, wanted Trump to defend the program on the grounds that high-skilled immigration is integral to spurring economic growth and fueling 'American dynamism.' Ultimately, the tech right carried the day, with Trump intervening in the online spat to defend the H-1B program. After the feud, the two sides struck a tentative peace, and the contretemps quieted down as Trump reentered office. But the renewal of hostilities between Trump and Musk this week shows that the underlying ideological disagreement between the two factions was never really resolved. And despite all the current bluster about the 'big, beautiful' spending bill, the Epstein files, the ballooning national debt and Musk and Trump's overlarge egos, that divide still runs straight through the same issue that carved up the factions back in December: immigration. That may seem counterintuitive, given that the latest blow-up between Trump and Musk is ostensibly over the fiscal consequences of Trump's megabill — and specifically Musk's contention, supported by independent analyses but rejected by the Trump administration, that the bill would add significantly to the federal debt. But when you strip away all the salacious controversies swirling around the 'BBB,' the fight over the legislation ultimately boils down to the question of whether cracking down on immigration should stand alone as the Trump administration's guiding priority. In the eyes of the MAGA populists, the $155 billion that the BBB appropriates for immigration enforcement and Trump's mass deportation efforts more than justify its passage, whatever its fiscal shortcomings might be. As Stephen Miller, the populist right's go-to immigration hawk, recently put it, the bill includes 'the most significant border security and deportation effort in history' — a fact which 'alone makes this the most important legislation for the conservative project in the history of the nation.' That immigration is at the center of the administration's pitch for the bill should come as no surprise. Since 2016, the issue has been the ideological keystone around which Trump has built his protean and sometimes unwieldy coalition. During the 2024 campaign, Trump and his running mate, JD Vance, proposed solving practically every issue that was thrown their way — from the housing shortage to inflation to 'wokeness' — by tying it back to their promised immigration crackdown. Once in office, the president's first acts included claiming unprecedented emergency authority to carry out his plan for mass deportations. But the centrality of immigration created tension as Musk and his fellow travelers on the tech right began to enter MAGA fold in the leadup to the 2024 election. The tech right threw its weight behind Trump's proposed agenda on immigration, but it was never the group's top priority. Much more important for MAGA's tech faction was taming the federal deficit, which Musk and others moguls — notably Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel — continue to view as an existential threat to the country's future. Their anxiety about the federal debt is rooted as much in their libertarianism as it is in their self-interest: every dollar the federal government spends servicing the federal debt is a dollar that it does not invest in the supposedly revolutionary technologies — backed by their firms — that they believe will lead to true 'American dynamism.' The misalignment between the priorities of the populist right and the tech right was clear from the start. It was apparent to Miller, who just this week raged that 'you will never live a day in your life where a libertarian cares as much about immigration and sovereignty as they do about the Congressional Budget Office.' It was also apparent to Vance — a perceptive observer of the coalitional dynamics within the MAGA movement — who dedicated an entire speech earlier this spring to arguing that immigration restriction and technological innovation could be mutually-reinforcing goals. 'This idea that tech-forward people and the populists are somehow inevitably going to come to a loggerhead is wrong,' said Vance, identifying himself as 'a proud member of both tribes.' Vance, it turns out, was wrong. To the contrary, the Trump-Musk schism is proof that MAGA loyalists can't have their cake and eat it too. They must choose — a maximalist immigration crackdown, or something else. The vengeance with which the populist right has turned on Musk since his spat with Trump is proof of what happens when a Trump ally — even the richest man on Planet Earth — chooses something else. That the fight really hinged on immigration became clear from the commentary coming out of the populist right. 'Debt is BAD. The migrant crisis is orders of magnitude worse,' posted the activist Charlie Kirk in the midst of the blowup. 'I've never seen debt hold an apartment building hostage,' added another conservative commentator, referring to reports of gang-occupied apartment buildings in Colorado. Then there was Bannon himself, who responded to the feud by suggesting — what else? — that Trump should deport Musk. The near-term consequences of the Trump-Musk schism remain to be seen. Whispers of peace talks between Trump and Musk flitted around Washington on Friday, and Trump has publicly downplayed the significance of the skirmish. At this point, no other big names on the tech right have followed Musk in breaking from Trump. And even if Musk were to actively challenge Trump's GOP — by funding primary challenges to Republican incumbents or even trying to start his own party, as he hinted at on Thursday — the consequences would likely be less dire for the future of the MAGA movement than he might think. Vance, the presumptive heir to the MAGA throne, has been building his own independent fundraising network since 2022, which could insulate him from any Musk-related financial aftershocks. Vance 2028 would certainly like to have access to Musk's campaign dollars, but it's not reliant on them. In the long run, though, the Trump-Musk feud will cement immigration as the critical litmus test for membership in Trump's GOP. The critical ideological fault line within the MAGA movement runs between people who view immigration restriction as a means to an end and those who see it as an end in themselves. The thrashing of Elon Musk is a warning to anyone who finds themselves on the wrong side of that divide.
