RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Capital Market and Proxy NotesI believe PL would strongly agree with you on the analysts and he admits it is their #1 priority he's working on right now and it's been a failure over the last few years. He saw what we saw in less than a year at the helm, so he got it. To be fair, they also believe there really wasn't an exciting story as the "old" Thera and you never would have attracted anyone new. They needed to move the pipeline along to make it a complete and exciting story to attract the quality they desire, and they are in that spot now; hence, his push this year.
Recall they did do an initial improvement on the presentation, website, etc.. and probably knew it was an interim "minimal" fix on the way to something far superior, which I would think Leah is spearheading with the consultants for wording, information, data, videos, etc...and working with their web design teams to build a proper 2021 biotech website, like the ones we all see.
scarlet1967 wrote: Why should we believe that they haven't tried their very best already to "re-engineer"
many aspects of the company's operations?
Afterall they hired a new IR lady with over 20 years of experience. Enyone recall her comments last year about loads of interest from NASH and cancer analysts? So more than a year later even so they have progressed significantly in their programs as they have had many encouraging preclinical oncology results and started the phase 1 also again got the letter to proceed with phase 3 general(not HIV) NASH yet not even the analysts who got handsome commissions didn't bother to ask a single question and where were those other analysts?
These were the news we all have been waiting for almost 2 years hoping to see a decent positive reaction from a bull market. Does anyone remember Luc's comments re legacy analysts only incorporate the costs for their programs in their models but not allocating any value to them?
So the issue with the analysts has been ongoing for a while and the company knew about it and surely they have tried to solve it but failed.
qwerty22 wrote:
Adding to that question why now and not 12 months ago.
On a separate note are you talking about these guys?
https://www.lifesciadvisors.com/10-tips-for-non-deal-roadshows/
qwerty22 wrote:
What was the timetable for that? 2021?
Wino115 wrote: Just wanted to address your point 1. I think is wider in it's remit than perhaps was suggested. It's a full on comprehensive deal to help rethink and "re-engineer" the whole shebang -- website, how they present, how they frame and explain the science in an easy way, conferences, retail strategy, institutional strategy, branding, presentations, etc... That's how it was presented -- everything.
scarlet1967 wrote: First of all I would like to praise wino for his efforts, honoring the company’s request I am going to bring up few things without discussing specifics also I apologies for an element of negativity in my points I guess I have my reasons for not being more positive.
1-Apart from the life science approach it wasn’t any details in the conversation about plans to attract retail investors and as mentioned earlier many times the retail segment has grown significantly specifically in the last couple of years therefore many companies have shifted their marketing strategies targeting the retail investors more actively/on a continues basis.
2-The company seems to think the board’s composition as it stand now is almost ideal my concern is this board had long enough time to educate/motivate institutions, retail segment etc. which hasn’t been successful to date and it seems like they are happy to keep implementing same strategies going forward and it concerns me because they still think their failing strategy is the right one and needs more time.
3-I don’t think they own enough shares and it is important as if they each had a significant holding they would be much more motivated/engaged to utilize whatever tools available to support the valuation, often companies with higher insider ownership than THTX’s 1.2% have more proactive/protective leadership and I can name many companies with much higher insider ownership but very few with less than THTX. It’s just part of human nature to protect your interest first before others.
4-As wino pointed out time is essence specifically for a company which has been falling behind the competition with their marketing and I just don’t sense the urgency needed from the company to deal with many issues discussed by us, again if one is falling behind in a race you won’t catch up by going at the same speed as others, for instance how long does it take to upgrade the website remember if I recommend this company to a friend as there isn’t many coverage/information out there that person probably search the internet first they will come across this MB and stocktwits with few followers compared to the piers and next thing they will do is to look at their website therefore having an appealing website is not only is essential but their very first point of sale, often that point of sale has very narrow window so after a short period of time that potential future investor will decide to keep researching or move on. That is why it is a must/start to have the website setup in a way that everyone from educated investors to average joe type understand and is impressed by and it should have been done long ago.
5-As per the IR communicating with shareholders has improved I am afraid that hasn’t been the case at all, try to send few emails to Leah with legit enquiries and see how many of those she choose to respond to even if the enquiry is not legit and she can’t address it because of strategic reason/none public information a friendly IR person would respond back and explain the reason why they can’t discuss it.
6-Overall it doesn’t look like there will be significant changes, yes it seems the plan is to try harder with their current strategies which after many years seems to have not been successful which is hard to digest in the middle of the longest bull market in the history.