RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Very strange , even for ONC I'm not certain as to “ late", only going by history.
the reporting date has been March 3rd-5th , +/- a few days.
Id have to get into the fine print of governance to find out exact rules, dates etc.
Regarding public notice etc. & others can twist my words anyway your FUD mind sees fit....they have never been late reporting in 20+ years.
regarding the options that Matt did or did not utilize.
I read ( not on a public source) that he did use the options & said so.
So, I guess from your reply he did not? Yet Andrew D who was on his way out did.
That I did see on public record.
What did Andrew know that Matt did not? Absolutely nothing, Yet he filled his option requirements, then left.
question ? Why did Matt not utilize his options?
Mutiple reasons:
it costs him $$ to do that. Regardless of his " massive" wages, perhaps not the free cash to do so?
could be he sees no future in Onc what so ever & would not dare spend another dime?
could be in the midst of negotiations & cited for insider trading if he did exercise the options.
Could be with his existing share, options & buy- out protection, he does not need the added amounts.
on that last note & the first note. Even Bill Gates divested a huge majority of his Microsoft shares.
not because he does not believe in the company, only because it is BAD BUSINESS, to have all of your eggs in one basket.
Respectfully if Onc fails. Matt not only looses his job, but his whole life savings. Onc does not have an employee pension plan.
It is easy to FUD, bash or in the case if some,just random jibberish.
I try hard to resurch all that I post on this site.
i find it most interesting thst the same FUDsters, take great effort to find mistakes. The reporting dates for example & blowing that way out of proportion, all the while forgetting the important stuff.
example.
onc just recently announced positive results with anal cancer trial ( with Roche tecentriq), advancing thst trial to next phase. ...based on exceptional results ( co therapy with Roche).
that being 3 out 4 successful arm of the Gobblet trial..
Again, my previous post this am, has mutiple " could be disclaimers"
My personal opinion, they are in negotiations with Roche & we will hear about such very soon.
What I do know , and most who follow, onc needs to have 12 months of cash on hand to stay listed on the NAS.
So as I have said repeatedly, they MUST have a business development very soon.
Best case for everyone, even Matt is a complete buyout.
does not mean that will happen.
other options?
Another bought deal, similar to previous $15 million or so.
ATM? ( difficult in existing price range)
partership, with upfront & biobucks.
Taking Onc private , via a venture capital arrangement.
Another , way- out option is a complete restructuring of Onc. Issuing not only a large # of new shares, but also warrants for existing shareholders. I have seen similar in the past. It does dilute, but offers existing shareholders the opportunity to benifit from future upsides.
Bottom line. ....and ONC management certainly know this, the status quo can not continue.
My opinion FWIW , a buyout from Roche.
Id be thrilled to see the FUDsters make even one comment about Pela, the company or the ongoing trials.
Regretably so, far all they have provided is personal attacks. Towards others or Onc.
Cementing their identity as professional bashers.