RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:10 questions from RBC January 8I believe classing standard protocols(terminology) conducting a cancer trial as weakness is not a balanced view as for NASH it seems even the EMA rejected their protocol they still will go a head with the trial in the US where the drugs are priced higher than Europe thus still a massive financial opportunity.
Listen if they had both drugs approved the SP would be 30, 40 or 50 fold higher than current levels, the question is why a phase 1 PDC trial and soon a phase 3 NASH company doesn't get any credit for their R&D programs? The RBC analyst still thinks Egrifta's patent will end sooner than reality and that says it all about his competence as for Mr, Nash's last report he got just about everything wrong and that says it all about his competence. Until the company gets coverage from reputable analysts the ball is in their court meaningful how effectively the market the company to the whole market.