RE:RE:RE:If PLI needs a Financing A reply from Fred. He took a couple points I made from my email and extrapolated.
_____
New indications, = more money:
Again, we have demonstrated that we have on a pro-forma basis 1 year of cash ahead of us. Developing drugs is an expansive undertaking but the rewards are second to none. Clinical trials that have taken place in 2016 will be replaced by new ones in 2017 and the new programs are not necessarily additive per say. Our 2017 budget is almost finalized as we speak but it is clear that we’ll function within our means and we do not see the R&D spending increasing out of control what so ever, people are assuming that, we know better. You also need to understand that many activities are currently being reported as R&D expenses but will move to the cost of goods section as soon as we get to commercial stages. We have put in place the infrastructure to support the launch of multiple products without adding additional costs for each and every new products coming
We need to see some money to validate what we have.
Youn can partner clinical assets but again there is dilution in that as well. We believe in partnering that makes sense. We are not about to give the farm away just so this would be perceived as external validation. Once you have done that, the asset is no longer yours and have just capped the value. We will partner with the right partner at the right moment and for indications and territories where it makes sense and is necessary. Japan is a good example since you need a local partner to do business anyway, so is China. US And EU can be partnered at a later or point or only if the deal is reflective of the value of the asset. We no longer need to do deals to finance the company, we are now doing deals if the make business sense. Rest assured that we will not everything ourselves. Clinical assets will be partnered in due time in a strategic manner.
______