RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Any company’s management team has a duty to maximize Oops, something got scrambled in that post. Lets try again...
Great post CS. Yes I agree it's virtually impossible to guess sp numbers on if efficacy is established across more that a single indication especially when it is strongly implied that it will also successfully treat many more indications. Having such a novel single/dual treatment approach is in a territory of it's own. One can only hope that the long awaited bidding war would reflect that.
Yajne wrote: CancerSlayer wrote It's hard to put a price on TLT considering its ACT is so novel & versatile. I don't look at our value per indication, because it's so much more than that. Establishing efficacy across more than a single solid tumor type would be impressive & would dramatically change the approach to this company's valuation...as it becomes more evident that we may be sitting on a silver bullet for solid cancers in the name of TLD-1433 (or its improved version). Then consider the inordinate added value x-ray activation (or its equivalent) would bring. Then imagine if all goes well in the infectious disease dept. By this point, it would be a fool's errand trying to assign a value : )
I hope we can remain independent until "at least" we have FDA approval with NMIBC & proven efficacy in at least one other indication. Good luck..