RE:RE:MarketsMy thoughts are as follows.
John Wallace was the founder of the science, he is exceptional in his field and well recongnized by his peers in the scientific and medical community. He is not an individual with any particularly strong business acumen as far as I'm aware of.
Dan Legaut happens to be his college friend who has experience in the business world.
A partnership is formed.
You can question whether this qualifies someone as being the best person for any given role.
Putting that aside.
The product being developed is real, and it's significant should it ultimately come to market, it will be global.
The business side of it is an entirely diferrent issue.
There are certainly events that have taken place which can have a valid argument as being
ill-timed, or simply not the best option.
In conversations with Dan, I have brought up some of those concerns, sometimes for no reason other than clarification, and in most cases, the response received was acceptable.
I would also note, that given these perceived concerns, there seems to be enough awareness on managements part to bring in the desired help in areas where help is potentially needed, i.e bringing in Don Haut.
Doing this, shows me that there is a willingness to do whatever is necessary to continue moving positively forward. This provides a certain degree of assurance, there are several minds at work.
I would however be cautious with these concerns, for two reasons:
1) The stock price is down. This is causing major disappointment with retail investors, and I throw emphasis on retail. Not to suggest that the concerns are not valid, but they are most certainly being driven, or possibly exagerated to a certain degree based on the lack of seeing any traction in stock price. This lack of performance makes it incredibly easy for people to throw blame, and the immediate reaction would be, who else is there to blame but the top executive responsible for signing off on all final decisions.
2) We don't know exactly what's being done behind closed doors. There needs to be an understanding. When decisions are being made, they are not being made in consideration of moving the stock price, they are being made to further the development of the business, in a much longer timeframe than what the market usually cares to wait for.
As far as specifics such as delays, timing, etc. I have always been of the belief that it serves everyone well from a managerial standpoint, to underpromise and overdeliver, as opposed to overpromise and underdeliver.
To the point of whether he is or is not the best qualified for the role is anyone's conclusion and perhaps both sides have a valid argument.
I think that the intermediate processess being done are both necessary, and will ultimately show to be effective.
At the end of the Antibe story, I think it is bright, and shareholders, myself included, will be rewarded well.
Forestview wrote: GCB - I've enjoyed your posts. Well written, well thought through. You clearly are an experienced investor. I am curious though of what you think about Dan as a leader/CEO. As you can see on this board, many of the posts indicate a frustration in his management and leadership style (some may even say we lack confidence in his duty to keep shareholders best interest in mind).
I'm invested in the science, significantly, and I'm excited to see it take hold in the market, but I'm not excited by DL and I believe he's had multiple missteps - the latest bought deal I believe was ill timed, and included unnecessary warrants (again my opinion). Further, I feel that he isn't strong at hitting time committments causing the market to punish the stock.
I'd be curoius, given you come across as an experienced investor, how you rate his performance, whether in the context of a junior biotech, or as a public company.
GameChangerBet wrote: The general markets are currently experiencing a rotation is assets.
High risk, tech, health care, growth stocks are selling off. That money is flowing into value, high yields, and gold, and predominatly junior gold stocks. This rotation is well under way, but still in the early stages. This is why you are seeing stocks like Tesla, bitcoin, selling off.
ATE can certainly experience downward momentum in the short term as this rotation continues, certain price points are not impossible.
However, in ATE's case specifically, due to the number of expected positive developments, both in the near term and further out, it should be able to maintain a certain bottom price level until such developments are brought to market.