tdon1229 wrote:
Infinity wrote: Skyhawk1, I agree you have a good point on trial data is all that matters.. I do have a personal stake in cancer cure and a fairly substantial investment in Theralse that I believe has the potntial.
However, I believe the current CEO has a real job to project this trial data on a periodic basis that the previous CEO failed to do, Shawn may very well be a knowledgable and smart CEO, but lacking in vision for the future. He never believed deep down that this therapy has exponential potential. Shawn never had a major stake in the company that he was the CEO. Clearly indicates that he did not believe in it being profitable. If you fail to see the potential growth of the company or unable to communicate that knowlege and smarness , it is pretty much worthless.
I would think every month or couple of weeks with an update from Roger would be great. I believe Roger is a great communicator and I am not sure what is holding him back from issuing PR statements that clearly outlines the progress the clinical study has made, new enrollments etc. Basic facts on test results and future paths for this company?
Wishful thinking only sets you up for disappointment when your wishes are not realized.
Two factors are at play here:
1. Theralase contracted out the trials. The patient data and results don't belong to Theralase until the trial is complete, the data is submitted for approval, and the data is released to the company by the contractor. The Principal Investigator determines what data gets revealed, and when, since he is responsible for the integrity of the data, as well as for coordinating with each trial site's designated principal investigator, with the company, and with the reviewing authorities (HC and FDA).
2. Despite what you may think, shareholders are not entitled to know the trial data. Many companies don't release any interim results. The fact that the company chooses to get some data released is a bonus, but we were told we would not get information on a per patient basis for this Phase 2 trial.
As for Roger, he has been a decent entrepreneur, but I think it's likely he lacks some of the capabilities necessary to grow the company. Harvard Business Review identified this problem with entrepreneurs almost 50 years ago. Simply put, the entrereneur, be he scientist, technical specialist, or engineer, who has the idea and pushes it into development most often is not the person best equipped to grow the company through its "Corridor of Crisis".
Successful entrepreneurs bring aboard the personnel with the skills and capabilities to grow the company, even if that means stepping aside from the total leadership role. Many entrepreneurs don't have the good sense, or the control of their egos, to relinquish their autonomous control, which explains why their entrepreneurial ventures don't thrive or become successful.