RE:RE:RE:No tradesSo far, one would have to conclude that TH has learned nothing from their experience last September when they made the rather startling and huge announcement that they were now pursuing a generla NASH pahse III trial. They put together a truly excellent conference call but it was all a waste since they gave no one any indication this step was about to be taken and held the call with no notice. So, they made a bold stroke that should have defined Paul's tenure in a very postive way, but they had not done any groundwork to prepare investors for this big news and it fell completely flat. The investment community has to be nurtured and prepared if it is even going to show up and listen to what a company has to say. It is not clear that this problem has been fixed since then and it is easy to argue that it has actually gotten worse since the company even burned the few remaining loyal shareholders left who were paying attention with the OO. I am hopeful LSA has a good plan to sort this out but I have not seen anything that offers me encouragement on that front yet.
They have a really, really big problem with no one paying any attention to the very interesting things going on and I am still not convinced they have fully embraced how big of a hole they are in on the capital markets side of the equation.
Wino115 wrote: I must say this lack of activity is really quite astounding to me. I think it supports a lot of what Scarlet and others have been saying about how the stock market and what drives trading has changed heavily in the last few years, accellerated by the pandemic computer screen trader crews. I don't think it means the old traditional institutional investor is dead and gone, but it has changed.
There is a sense that you have to really button-up your investment narrative, making it clean, compelling and precise. You need influencers too --some retail, some insitutional. We know the institutional angle relies on the amplification and introduction by really good analyst who cover the space you are operating in (now oncology, NASH, small biotech) and whose following respects their opinions. We know at this point we really only have Cannacord and he's just a NASh expert. There's just zero amplification going on -- maybe even negative amplification since the NBF and Mackie guys were just part of a trade and don't look at THTX has a highly prospective investment.
Yes, we need facts and that will heavily drive whatever value-enhancement the facts can support, but they do need to start laying the groundwork NOW. PL has mentioned all sell side firms need a quid pro quo. We'll I would give it to them. I'd hardball them now and say that between a high probability of various partnerships in areas they don't want to sell or compete in and ultimate need for further cash down the road for acquisitions, trial follow-through, etc... that if you want to be part of those, start your coverage right now. It's getting rather dire for them and looks like if they do nothing, any good news will be the tree that fell in the forest no one heard. Time to hardball Cantor Fitz, Jeffries, RayJay, Piper, Stifel, Barclays, Goldman, etc.... Get any one of them on board ASAP if you can. Have Molson set up some calls and put a little bit of his skin in the game. That's the primary reason he's on the Board.
jeffm34 wrote: Still haven't hit 1000 shares yet after 3 hours of trading