RE: BIOEYEinteresting that you would make a rare appearance to defend this "forum" of multiple aliases, censorship and other dubious practices.
you also seen to conveniently characterize the pumping here as the
"positive expression of the known status of the science" right after you say that "until ONC releases information to confirm the status of the science, the stock market is essentially stymied."
apparently you are implying that you (like so many of your "friends" here) know better than the market - a lofty position that apparently has endured now low, these many years.
all the while, BT & MC maintain their self-imposed "cone of silence" in the onc bunker, perhaps chanting to themselves, "i think i can, i think i can", while two of their largest shareholders quietly dumped every single last one of their onc shares on the market. the 15 patient prostate trial continues, soon to enter its 3rd year, the ph I glio trial the same, while the systemic ph II trial promised for 2002 is only a couple of years late so far & counting.
and then we have shareholders underwhelmed by the market reaction to the recent news of FDA approval of erbitux and its implications for onc.
but you know better and have for years now, right?
perhaps you are unfamiliar with the concept of accountability, but that is what is lacking with onc, and because of that, so is their credibility with the market, and ultimately the share price.
oh yea, i forgot - we are way up from the $40M Canadian value the market put on this company when they didn't "know any better".
maybe that's why the teachers pension fund & curtis sold?