RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:HERE IS THE AWNSER
Its probably not that simple. Management/scientists no doubt were surprised the results came out as they did. Even if they suspected the 'statin issue', it still would have taken weeks for them to amend the results to account for it. I bet they never thought the market reaction was going to be so severe. As I mentioned very early, when this was all playing out, the real issue is a potentially very damaging legal one now. Hypothetically, if T1 results (and the pending T2) are in fact statistically significant after all the poor protocol elements are removed you can't go back in time and undo the 'stock price damage' that has ensued. People made real time decisions based on the perceived extremely negative outcome of T1 - exasperated, justifiably or not, by the MSM and no doubt the nefarious elements associated with the competition. Many that got out are waiting, many stayed the course and perhaps even added to their position believing this is a buying opportunity, many continue to short. One could argue, that is the risk of playing the market. One could also reasonably argue that if a mistake was made during testing (that should never have been allowed to occur) investors have a legitimate case for compensation preferably not via litigation which takes years and usually results a miniscule payout settlement. In todays day and age of supposedly advanced computer technology you would think that if a grievous mistake or error is made in the content of released information (whether it be financial or otherwise) all trades spawned from that erroneous info should be immediately reversed no matter what the cascading effects on other trades may be. Yes this would be a nightmare for the exchanges but perhaps it would ensure that no info is ever released unless it has been thoroughly checked and verified. If there is any doubt as to the veracity of results then a stock must be halted (for as long as it takes to sort out an issue) to avoid an 'unfair' judgement by the market - especially a market with ADD and so easily swayed by fake news. This would also help to prevent the gaming of info and the use of insider info. As many have already alluded to, the credibility of management has been hugely compromised. ACST isn't the first company to err so epically, nor will be the last, but is not the reason you pay CEOs, COO, CFOs (especially those with years of experience) immense salaries and stock options so that a potential (as yet unconfirmed) mistake such as this does not occur? For now, unless the OSC and SEC change their policies I guess that is why we have litigation. No matter what good news comes from ACST from this point, someone is getting sued. That is one guaranteed double down I would be willing to make that only an extreme idiot would short.