RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:First Patient Dosed in Phase 1 Trial of TH1902 I don't think either the long term prospects of the company has changed based on few days price action having said that most serious biotech are valued fairly yet THTX's valuation struggles to gain any lasting momentum. All these printed news are the bare minimum the company could to promote the valuation, I am not sure it is a lazy or lousy marketing. Their science and timely executions have been neglected and this is something the company should address. In the last few days they had the AACR abstracts which were initially nowhere to find and then the NASH sub analysis followed by the initiation of phase 1 oncology any of those should theoretically appreciate the valuation significantly especially from such a low levels yet they didn't therefore they should follow it up by a CC and not in too long future they should attend a retail oriented event.
The last few days the short volume has been on the rise so traders use these catalysts to play the stock which could be mostly avoided if the company proactively had promoted itself thus more demand from serious investors.
qwerty22 wrote: I don't think THTX are doing anything different to what most serious biotech do, this is the tradional way to approach much of the science stuff. The science stuff while important usually doesn't speak directly to commercial milestones so usually it is of less significance and therefore requires no fanfare. It is odd to me that repeatedly the stock responds to the science data and not to any of the more concrete commercial milestones, I think this is exuberant trading on data that most people struggle to understand. While it's exciting to watch as a shareholder I'm not sure all this SP action has much relevance to the long term health of the company or stock, they need to impress the market in the more traditional ways and have that impactful. It wouldn't surprise me if today's action is part of the hangover from Monday's frenzy as anything to do with today's PR.
scarlet1967 wrote: Isn't this "milestone", Dr. Stanley's sub analysis even(not posted on the website) AACR abstracts worth a CC?