RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:All these yearsbionicjoe wrote: The closing of the phase 1b trial is probably it for a while concerning big news. Now it's a matter of summarizing the data and hopefully using it to stoke some interest in sponsoring a phase 2 trial. There is the matter of bringing the FDA officially onboard. I don't know what timeframe we'd be looking at to process an FDA application to hold a phase 2 trial in the States but I can see it taking the better part of this year before the last i is dotted and the last t crossed. For those holding out hope that they would start another trial in the meantime for a different cancer indicator all I can say is notice how lately there has been so little talk from management on the subject. If you need further convincing then just read their last MD&A or the Q1 2018 financials and it will quickly become apparent this company at the present time is not exactly gushing with cash. They even cut back on their IR's budget, if memory serves.
There's bound to be some small feel good PRs released before the AGM. IMO, they should go back to the Q&A format of 2 years ago that proved so informative for shareholders. Nothing better than a live presentation by one of the key doctors with the followup Q&A period but they may not want to risk uncomfortable questions being asked. Even better would be the CEO or RW taking part but that might be too much to ask.
It only gets harder and more stressful from here on in. Now the endpoint will be does the science work even beyond 180 days?
"they should go back to the Q&A format of 2 years ago" As usual, what in the h-ll are you talking about? There was a lengthy Q&A session at the last AGM, with a number of questions raised, with them even going over the allotted time. Plus they werent all softball lob questions either.
If you feel that uncomfortable questions wont be asked, how about you showing up at the AGM then?