Wino115 wrote:Yes, let's see what the science informs us of - if they tell us. But you bring up a good point. Why, when they have individual sessions and answer Q&A, do investors leave with a generally positive view on the oncology program, thus business and investment prospects for the company?
It may be that those investors know enough to "fill in the blanks" in the non-disclosures they are sharing. I'm not really sure. But I do know once they have the facts, they need to get very, very good at providing interpretation to the market that not only underlines the importance of what they may be saying, it's effect, it's place in the overall POC/MOA/Program progress, but also provide the factual backup -- this study said this, our preclinical said this, the program showed us this, therefore we strongly believe it is doing this, this and this and, if so (which we will determine in basket, P2, etc...) it would mean this to the drug and program. Here is why we think this and why it's important. The risks around it are this, this, this -we need to be cautious interpreting this fact and that fact, but here's how we reached our thinking on this part based on this and this.
They really need to create all full structure around the program and we know that everything won't be perfect and there's much to be learned, but they've also learned a huge amount and they need to start building a strong foundation to support it all and not just an ad-hoc structure that looks flimsy to the market. Build it -- but the facts, the theories, all of it together and slowly build a bullet-proof package around it. If there's reasons to be positive, start really building the case with facts, not just stating you are positive. That's no longer enough. They need to start putting the facts out there for the market to analyze and for them to show us why it's a strong start and not a meaningless program that looks suspect already. That's what the market believes.
scarlet1967 wrote:The issue as you, Wino and many frustrated shareholders have been complaining about is lack of transparency and very poor communication for instance your impression from that call was confidence, overall positive etc. now why can't they communicate all those encouraging news with all the shareholders and even better making decent efforts to spread the good news to new investors. Personally I want to hear it from the company not second hand news from you or someone attending the meeting. We are privileged to get the information you are sharing but how far does that goes behind few investors following this board?
Many sectors and major indexes are hitting 52 weeks lows as for XBI peaking in early 2020 it has been declining since then so what is company's mitigation strategy? Private meetings with few larger shareholders? We are complaining about low trading volume an obstacle for potential new investors to get in and if choose so get out without causing extreme volatility who should address it? Last year they were a webcast during AGM this year they dropped it, is this the promised rebranding? Not me but many investors are still holding their positions only because of the oncology program so where is the efforts to keep those folks interested? I did my part contacting the company many times to pass the message now I really hope some of those bigger holders vote against board members who only collect their compensation and don't contribute anything in return.
SPCEO1 wrote:It is worth noting the XBI was down 8.2%, so, THTX actually outperformed. I am sure that makes you feel much better ;)
ANALIAS00 wrote:
Thanks all ! .... Based on the SP today no one is expecting great news. More waits ! :o)