Saratoga—are you still accumulating? Heck, if a good buy at 4, then an even better buy at 2! Yet when does one stop? Still, better odds than Vegas—where a slight edge over 50-50 built an entire oasis in the desert.
Following this for two years now—in near 4, then more at 6—so of course more in the 2s! Lol. How the love of the science traps us all. Now, pot committed—and hoping #9 on Left-E’s Part 2 List does not happen. As Humphrey Bogart would say it today: “We’ll always have Lpathomab!”
Charles, really, try to spend some time on the FDA web site to learn about clinical trials, plenty of information on clinical trials, regulations (law), processes, guidance, concerns.
Also check out:
-Declaration of Helsinki
-Common Rule (base on the Belmont Report)
Likely serious prison time for those responsible if a company did an under the table trial, MD's would lose their licenses, perhaps prison too. Too many historical abuses.
hey lefte so for asking this again and if you were im sure you wouldnt tell me but you can email me if you want. i have plenty of emails from mr. pancoast and the wording in the emails is exactly as yours. and i know for a matter of fact scott pancoast read the yahoo message board because he sent me meassages reguarding the message board. anyways if your not ill believe you but if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck must be a duck. anyways i appreciate your knowledge of the science
chuck, if john was still around he would likely tell you these were pre-set share grants and it's been happening every year same time... but unfortunately he's had enough of us :(
Are you really that thick? If you think and can prove there is something nefarious taking place, then give a call or write to Preety Bharra, 1 Saint Andrews Plaza, NY, NY 10007 (212)637-2200 --- he's looking to get his battering average up after losing a few appeals anyway.
I believe these were restricted stock units, so the filing is for actual shares not options. There are income tax consequences either when granted/vested or delivered. And of course when ultimately sold. Timing here is probably per ESPP documents. It would be interesting to know how much flexibility they allow.
Regarding Donald Swortwood, he's certainly fair game for criticism in terms of his actions and I enjoy parody, some of the screen names, even lampooning as long as long as it doesn't cross over to unsubstantiated, mean-spirited character assassination. There's a lot at stake so behavior and integrity matter. But ask yourself this question: How many millions did you invest back in 2005 ? I'm thinking particularly of the question asked about board purchases on the conference call. Here's an individual who stepped up to the plate with significant hard cash invested at highest risk and longest term when the molecules were barely more than a twinkle in a test tube. Should they prove useful in medicine any of us or a loved one could benefit. Forget investing and remember his initiative the day your central vision goes out and you can no longer type an SOS. Let alone an apology. Bringing new meds to the clinic is as noble as it gets in my book. The world needs more risk-takers like that. By the way, I've never met him, so fire back if I'm totally off base. Meanwhile, I'm modifying my top ten list Part 1 because it is a factor in deciding on whether to invest:
11. Significant, long-standing investment by insiders (at least 1 insider). IMO, Left-e
5 thousand shares and lets say the results are tremendous with 19 million shares outstanding this stock could go to 50 lets say. so 5,000 shares at 50 dollars is 250,000 dollars and you call that chump change
we are talking about chump change for these guys no? i believe the options were 5k shares or so. who would be stupid enough to risk going to jail for that?? i think uncle is right.
No they filed them because they were restricted options that vested coincidentally on the date when they did. If they knew the results and did that, they would be using the proceeds to hire good criminal defense lawyers.
He would own double that amount; however, he had to give his first wife half his stock as part of the divorce decree.
I agree with you Fred in that they will find a way to screw us. It's like Gordon Gecko said, "If this guy owned a funeral home, no one would die". Just look at the 4's filed yesterday. These SOB's just happen to have their restricted options vest within the very same quarter and within weeks of us getting the results that will make or break this dorm room laboratory. Grant it they could not have foreseen the dates when they printed this money ( I mean filed the paperwork for these options) for themselves, but it is just more vinegar on the stale bread we have all been munching on here.
With regard to why 5 patients were excluded in the Phase 1 study, this is what Lpath stated in their patent application: Five of the fifteen subjects on study were not evaluable for biologic activity, either because they were found to have no active CNV at screening (3 subjects), or because they were treated prematurely with AVASTIN, a violation of study protocol (2 subjects). These subjects were included in the safety study results described above, but not in the preliminary analysis of biologic activity described in examples below.