RE:RE:RE:Nothing changes I have heard from someone at TH that I trust that Paul is very good at his job. He did not start the NASH process but he did make the transition to general NASH successful by bringing the FDA on board with that and this was a real long shot in my view. And he did not buy Katanna but he seems to have managed that process pretty well with the very large exception of the excessive amount of time spent on the phase 1a. He has strengthened the management team significantly by raiding Pfizer and added an old Pfizer colleague to the board too. He also got the ex-Pfizer CMO to join as a consutant. I am sure if I thought harder about it, I could list a number of other things too if I thought more about it. But, suffice it to say he has done a pretty good job in every area he is responsible for other than the stock price. Unfortunately, that is a big area to miss on. If you cannot tie improvements you are making to increased investor confidence in the company than what is the point for investors?
Bucknelly21 wrote: [what is paul actually responsible for that is so successful? Nash was not him, and neither was oncology, just wonding how you justify a fat salary wjile delivering nothing
quote=SPCEO1]Given that the bubble has been popped, retain investors have been hammered and the bull market is gone too, the chances of a really good stock price response to any positive information TH might report in the weeks ahead is far less than it once was. Since TH still has no effective research coverage and has yet to hire a IR person (I am sure all noticed an LSA was the MC on the conference call), it is not clear to me how the stock will get the sponsorship it needs to move significantly higher on good news. The trading volume recently has been totally dreadful as well as it is clear few other than ourselves are paying much attention to TH. Our CEO has done a lot of positive things but he has not even come close to fixing these issues with the marketing of the stock and the environment to now do so is much more difficult than it was through most of his now nearly 2 year tenure. From my perspective, it is a really big failure. He has given us the ONO, lower analyst coverage, lower trading volume and no sponsorship of the stock - if the Grumpy Grader came out from hibernation the only grade he could possibly give would be an F-. Since we are the people our CEO actually works for, it is hard to understand how this has not been a higher priority for him to get sorted out. And the board member added to appease grumpy shareholders has also not shown to be able to convince Paul of doing things more successfully either. Since Paul joined TH, the stock price has gone nowhere even though he has significantly improved the prospects of the company. In the end, if the stock price does not reflect the improvement, we may need a new CEO who has a better grasp on tying improving trends at the company to improving trends in the stock price.
The defense the company gives is that TH has greatly outperformed the XBI over the last year. Unfortunately, we cannot eat relative performance - we need the stock price to actually rise.
Bucknelly21 wrote: Despite learning many valuable lessons from the market and some analysts thera continues on the same non effective path in regards to transparency and market engagement. Do we really think that even if they get good results from the 1a/b that they will be able to capture the appreciation that would be due? Idk even if a Chinese partnership is announced they have not shown me they are capable of doing a good deal. I hope im wrong but im just going off past experience
[/quote]