RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Is anyone one adding? Why or why not?I know it's impossible because it would push the price up just by doing it, but I am sure you would not buy more than 1/10 of your actual position. Also, if Levesque's job depends on phase Ia results, it is strange. I would think that Marsolais would be the guy on the hot seat. Turning Katana into a legit high potential oncology program for around 10 M$ would be a tour de force. Remember, some big brain here told us it was just a lottery ticket when they bought it. You would fire Levesque for losing at the lottery?
SPCEO1 wrote: Sorry for not being clear. Yes, I would buy THTX right now since I believe, on balance, the phase 1a data will be promising. It will likely be a mixture of positive and negative items but the positive will outweigh the negative. The company is telling us this by their actions (2 more scientists being hired as of yesterday, for example). Paul has said enough already to strongly hint at good results. If they have bad results, he will need to resign. I understand that it is hard to ignore the past failings but the future will determine the share price. Some are willing to bet on it now and others will want solid info first - neither is taking a bad approach but one will do better than the other. It is all about the individual investor's risk profile and personality.
jfm1330 wrote: You are not answering, so maybe that's the answer. Also, put yourself in the shoes of the CEO. He is aware of what's going on in oncology, so if it's bad, it would be dishonest to push investors to buy by telling them results are coming in a month. On the other end, if results are positive and he pushes investors to buy, these fully informed investors will say yes, but you said you would be in phase III in NASH now, you told the market that Thera was about to start selling Trogarzo in Europe. So there is a deficit of trust. And if as a CEO you know good results are coming in short order, why no just wait to disclose them with no need to make promises. With good results then you can promote and explain the value of what you have. My point is that it is easy to understand why very few investors are willing to buy at this time, and those buying are doing it on low volume at a low price.
SPCEO1 wrote: If I owned no shares in TH and had just come upon it, I would be very intrigued by it. The stock has been slammed due to the things you mentioned but we are roughly a month away from a potentially huge positive catalyst. All indications point to that catalyst as being positive in some manner, if not hugely positive. So, TH is an oversold stock with a high probability of good news in the very short term. It is a pretty good setup for an investor who is looking forward rather than backward. And if I were the CEO, I would be pointing that out to investors as often as I could.
jfm1330 wrote: If you would not own a single share in Thera now, knowing all you need to know, but judging just on facts of the last two years, would you buy now? Be honest. Peronnally I would not. Too many things went wrong and not as promised. That does not mean there will not be a positive outcome, but the facts are not pushing any well informed investor to buy. When I say well informed, I talk about knowing everything that is public information, not insider info. So just based on facts, no BS, I would not buy. For now I am hostage of the stock and I can only hope for a positive outcome in oncology.
SPCEO1 wrote: Yes you can promote a stock with a bad news flow and TH should be trying harder to do so, even if it does not work. It is an attitude and it is hardly asituation where there is nothing good at all to talk about, despite the negative issues they have faced. I think you would agree that no one right now likely owns the stock based on Trogarzo in Europe being the thing that will drive the stock higher. Maybe there are some still hoping that NASH will be the answer, but I don't think so. The stock price already reflected failure on these two fronts long before these recent announcements and the unfortunate situation with the water supply may one day be viewed as a blessing in disguise that kept TH from going down the NASH path and instead staying focused on cancer.
On the phase 1a delays, communications with investors could have and should have been managed a lot better than they have been. But if there is a way for TH to manage things to cause investors to question whether they are a legit management group, they seem to always unfortunatey find it. I do not believe they are anywhere near as bad as they often appear. But they need to up their approach and improve their attitude if they are going to change the tone in the market regarding the company's trustworthiness. I am not hopeful that is going to happen, however.
jfm1330 wrote: They listened to the message last year, the problem is that there is no magic wand. You cannot promote a stock that has no positive news and many negative ones. Buy our stock, we just put our phase III plans in NASH on hold. Buy our stock, we are seven months late in our phase Ia that was supposed to last six months, or eight at worst. Buy our stock we just decided to pull out of Europe with Trogarzo.
To me there is two reasons to hope for better days with this company, a big one, after growing pains in oncology they ultimately have result proving that TH1902 is working to some extent in selected patients. A smaller one, which is to see the sales of Egrifta go up significantly with their own salesforce and F4 and after that a pen injector with F8.
PWIB123 wrote: So you're argument is that because they didn't listen to the message last year, give them a pass this year? I don't think so.
jfm1330 wrote: You sent the so called message last year and what good did it achieve?
Do you think Levesque and Svoronos are not aware that shareholders are frustrated and unhappy?
Levesque was supposed to be so much better than Tanguay when he came in. Up to now, he brought no added value to the company. He did nothing Tanguay could not have done. The big pharma guy was not able to change anything, and if TH1902 is a success, it will still be an asset acquired by Tanguay.
The reality is that Thera is a speculative investment with Egrifta as a baseline asset in case of total failure in the R&D programs. The other reality is that R&D development takes time. Maybe that in 9 months we will praise a brilliant strategy with TH1902 and totally forgive the very slow execution or we will be down to Egrifta in lipo.
juniper88 wrote: I don't believe most of us actually want to vote off the entire board or even specific members. We don't have the power to do that. And because we don't have the power we are free to vote that way just to send a message.
jfm1330 wrote: I read all the complaints about management and the board and I understand the frustration with the company's performance, but I don't understand the idea to vote out the whole board, or even a single member of the board since there is no way to evaluate each member's contribution. I am old enough on this board to remember the reaction of some when Thera bought Katana. It was seen as just a lottery ticket, and now, just three years later, it is the main program of the company. Katana was bought under the former CEO, Luc Tanguay who was seen as an incompetent by some here. The same who are explaining to us the potential of the cancer market and how the company should be run...
Personnally, I am frustrated by only one thing, and it is the very poor guidance the company gave on the timeline to complete phase Ia. You cannot be so wrong about something like that. It raises questions about the understanding of the clinical trial realities by the company and it sows doubt about things to come. They did the same with the NASH program. The were too optimistic and had to find a way to walk back their promises. Overpromising and underdelivering lead to what we see with the stock price. The level of confidence in the potential of the company is low because they underdeliver and need to walk back on their plans, NASH, Trogarzo in Europe, and huge delay in phase Ia in oncology. That does not mean that it will all end up in nothing of value, but at this point, it is only negative news, delays, and postponements.