In addition to the questions I asked in my
"Advice from fuzzy" post, here are some others:
Did any pharma ever make overtures to Bioasis to acquire Bioasis?
If so, were the inquiries turned away because Bioasis knew that xB3 didn't work and selling the company would expose that?
Or were there inquiries turned away because if Bioasis were to be acquired at all, management wanted it to be by a private venture capital group (like the LT and The Placee group) so that Bioasis management could join that group and go along as a partner for the financial win? (Such a win for Bioasis management would be highly unlikely with an acquisition by a large pharma.)
Were there any pharmas who gave up their work with Bioasis because they saw how incompetent Bioasis management was?
Or were there any pharmas who gave up their work with Bioasis because they saw how Bioasis was progressing on a deal with a group that the pharma would never do business with, or because they couldn’t trust that group to respect and protect the pharma’s interests in their xB3 projects?
Did the shelving of xB3-001, the acquisition of the Cresence EGF stuff, the downplaying of the xB3 pipeline in corporation literature and promotions, and the pumping by Bioasis of the EGF “assets” convince any current or potential Bioasis partner or licensee that Bioasis no longer had confidence in xB3?
If so, was that part of the plan with Ladenberg Thalmann, to scare suitors (like Ellipses) away so it would appear to Bioasis shareholders that only a deal like that with LT and The Placee was possible?
Was (is) Rathjen capable of any of that stuff?
I got these questions from somebody else because I am too uninformed and stupid to come up with them all by myself.
jd