RE:Purdue and opioidsJust a small question, but how likely would it be that our new directors and scientific advisory board members, people who are totally hooked into, and are highly respected within, the pharmaceutical industry, why would they put their reputations on the line by joining this junior company if they thought that Purdue's problems would in some way reflect on Bioasis or themselves, or that their friends and colleagues at Bioasis could be hurt in the fallout from Purdue?
And given our knowledge of the Purdue issues (easily researched) and the positions the Bioasis people held at Purdue, also easily researched, and given Mark Day's knowledge of the people he's hired, why would this question be asked in the first place?
I know. Having the question occur to one's mind, and then letting it ripen, can turn that simple question into a mild concern, and then into a wild-eyed "OMG!"
Would these great people have joined Bioasis without Mark Day? They trust him. They know why they trust him, they know his capabilities and they understand that the combination of Mark Day and xB3 represents an opportunity to be part of something important, with no known negative strings attached.
Follow the money. Follow the smart people, especially if they have something to lose if it blows up.
If it's good enough for them, it's certainly good enough for me.
jdstox