RE:RE:RE:RE:so, according to the filingsyou're telling me that i've been unable to predict how it will be? wow. i must be losing my mind.
so i'm assuming you've got transcripts of the video where we're told that the company is cashflow positive at the time of that video? when was that, july of 2015? sure, that's in the past but i didn't make that up.
what about the emphatic statement regarding the medimmune collaboration.... oops, i mean license.
what about how great 2014, 2015 and 2016 were going to be? yep, there we go, the past again.
jd, the story has always been interesting and compelling but that's all its been up to this point, a story. anyone that made an investment decision made it based on what the company was saying at the time. just so happens that the company's valuation is less today than it was back then. how can you blame anyone for repeating what the company was stating?
if there's anything that can be taken away from that, its that a company could be worth significantly more during proof of concept stage than during pre clinical stage.
you can say all you want but the market will not give serious consideration to the equity until such time that it sees funding to support the 8 targets (see, i'm talking about the future now).
even at that time it probably won't get to excited (i'm talking about the future again) because we all know that we've had target engagement and pharmacodynamic activity in past animal studies (you see, the past).
the company needs to enter the clinic. for that it needs money and lots of it.
the only way the company moves forward is off its past. the only way the market moves forward is from its past. right now, the past is telling me it doesn't believe the go forward story. once the go forward story is unveiled and more importantly, executed on, just then we may get to see those stupid days. see, the future.
according to the 2017 financial statements, yes, that's right, the past again jd, the company's burn is $1.5 million per year. We've added MD, CL, GD, mackie and whatever else in behind the scenes on top of what was there for 2017 that although we can consider some of it to be accretive, still puts strain on the current treasury and restricts advancement of testing the 8 targets.
one thing we can agree on jd is that we're going to disagree. maybe i can't see the forest through the trees. maybe you can't. i don't know and i don't care. what i do know is that if i were to take investment advice from you and this forum, i would have less value in my money and account than i did when i started. don't go talking about potential cause you can't take that to the bank or buy groceries and booze with it. we all have potential, but potential, like words, is not what you got but how you use it. oh, and that goes for money too!
drj!