Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

PharmaGap Inc V.GAP



TSXV:GAP - Post by User

Comment by Brightbulbon Dec 16, 2010 11:04am
231 Views
Post# 17855749

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: SOME PEOPLE

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: SOME PEOPLESchiff, I agree with everything you've said but my optimism is defnitely waning here. The problem isn't the science its management.

I'm a product management guy and "back in the day" when you took a product to market you always sold the first few at a lower price. Your intention was to sell the product multiple times so not making as much money on the first few deals wasn't as important as building a customer base and proving that you knew how to monetize the product. That's when you raised money and could generally do so at much more favorable terms.

I know biotech is a completely different thing but business is business. They have stated on many occaisons that the drug can be used in multiple cancers. They also said they've had low-ball licensing offers. So why not take a lower licensing offer to prove they can monetize the asset and then make the big money on cancers 2, 3 ... ?

I'm going to take a real leap here and give MacInnes and Bryden the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are good businessmen. So what then would the reason be behind their high-risk/high-reward strategy of diluting everyone in order to get the big deal on the first cancer? To me there can only be 1 answer to this and that is that they have no intention of proceeding with the other cancer lines. I believe they are looking at the first deal as the last BIG deal and planning to sell or licence the whole thing based on success of the first set of trials.

If I was building a product that I only intended on selling once and taking one big swing for the fence, I'd do what they're doing.

If I'm wrong with this, then they really aren't good business people and are taking a huge gamble where - based on what they've said - a huge gamble doesn't seem to be required.

On another topic... I was at one of their sessions when they did the western canadian tour in the fall. I swear that whenever words came out of MacInnes mouth you could see Bryden's lips move just a bit.

What happened to the "steady stream" of press releases we were promised in the fall?

BB
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>