RE:RE:RE:How could Mackie have sold this to their clientsThe whining aspect, and you are not alone doing it here, is about the repetition, ad nauseam repetition. I understand your frustration, I bought back two days before the financing at 3.70$ CAN, and it is now at 2.95$. Do you think I am happy? No I am not. But I am still able to see the position management and BOD were in. You see the analysts reports? Well informed experts. Nobody wants to give the company credit in advance. They are waiting for hard facts on humans. That's the reality. I tried hard to turn it in many ways to make you and others here being able to see it, but despite my best efforts nobody seems to be able to recognize the situation the company was in. The bottom line is that I simply don't buy the incompetence argument or the malfeasance argument. I am sure people at Thera are competent and honest and did that thinking it was in the best long term interest of the company, incuding pre-financing shareholders.
I will repeat it, but the overlooked part of this story by many here, including you, is that they now go after two huge markets. So yes huge dilution, but much bigger potential than six months ago. These two opportunities are the result of actions from the previous CEO and the actual one, and the same BOD. They are the ones that by their decisions and work that gave the company these two very promising programs aiming at big time markets. So I am a tired of the constant complaining. They are doing a great job as far as I'm concerned and the SP is out of their control. Again. Remember the Ibalizumab/Trogarzo story we lived together here. We were complaining that the market was unable to recognize the true value of it, but after approval, with material and meaningful fact, the SP sharply rose. Only to fall afterwards because, in the end, we were all wrong here about the potential. So in light of that, I think we should be more restrained in what we claim to be the reality. Biopharma is a risky business. With the financing the management bought a two years insurance policy and the potential is still huge if success is there, down the line. So I am not insulting anybody here. I just try to see both sides of the coin.
SPCEO1 wrote: I agree that the upside remains huge but the debacle of this offering, with new pieces of it showing up most every day, cannot be overlooked. But I may take a longer break than Scarlett did, so you may get a break from my righteous indignation (which you refer to as whining).
jfm1330 wrote: Skipping a lot of posts here since it is very hard to read. It's a whinning festival with no end. That being said SPCEO, if you put 75% chance of success in NASH and apply the Mackie analyst numbers to it what would be the share price? And if you are confident in oncology, how much do you add to that???
What I am trying to say is what is the potential for the SP of Thera in the next five years, even with 120 M shares outstanding? 20$ US? 40$ US? 60$ US.
What I am trying to say, is that despite all the frustration you can have with the last financing, with the analysts, with the market, with the management. The fact is that the potential is still huge and the day they will come with real positive data on humans, if it happens, the SP will be overvalued at some point. If NASH and oncology end up being real success, this recent dilution will not mean much. The key is still the success of these two programs an decisions they will make if success is there. In other words, the dilution can be a step back two make a leap forward. I think you are forgetting the big picture out of frustration. Thera is still early in the game with NASH and oncology. There will be opportunities to make up in term of value for shareholders if these two programs are successful.
SPCEO1 wrote: if they really only believe there is a 10% chance of success in NASH?
None of this adds up. The foolishness of it all is hard to take on all fronts.