RE: Comments on Current StatusI agree with what you are saying here but here's something I don't understand.
It's been claimed that the technology is capable of being a useful treatment in several cancer lines and this is something that seems to have substantial data to support it.
I believe numbers have been thrown around where a licensor would pay north of $100M for a drug that has been through Phase II and they've indicated that there are potential licesensors in the wings but that the offers have not been lucrative enough even when risk adjusted. Fine - lets assume that's true.
But wouldn't taking a "low ball" offer for the 1st cancer line - even if it was a few million with perhaps some kickers to Pharmagap if certain targets are met - make sense? It would demonstrate the company is capable of monetizing the asset which would take away alot of skepticism about managements ability to execute. It wouldn't preclude GAP from getting the big Phase 2 payout on other cancer lines and would (I think) alleviate the need to raise more money.
I'm assuming that even a "low ball" offer would be in the low millions but this would seem to balance the short term needs with longer term objectives.
It wouldn't be the first time my logic has been flawed but I'm not sure I see it here.
BB