"give them some ?'able numbers and let them do the math"My old buddy See-less always told me this ; - )
I noticed in the most recent MD&A, that the discussion around the 2nd interim result ( the important one with 55M+ shares printed, mostly at 29 CENTS ), that the number of patients the DSMB/FDA guided for patient count adjustment was NOT included. This number is rather important, as per the Cormark report of Nov.6/16 that tells us the adjustment to 605 patients indicates an 11 to 12% absolute benefit or near double the advertised "per pre specificied protocol patient population" Shouldn't this number be in the MD&A? I would say YES, given the SAGA that insued round the 3 NR attmept to explain the interim results and the rather large ( 25% DILUTION to insiders )
I'm sick and tired of being "had" by intentional games and missing information. Looks like some people think they can come to Canada and throw the Fiduciary Duty responsibility straight into the garbage binn.
I would say that had we been told that 11 to 12% binn achieved earlier on ( outside the "per specified pre protocol patient population" ) , the 5% surprise would have binn tough to "move the Coleman tent trailer" to the brink of the cliff...speaking of cliff, I wonder how much he is buying here?
Squire