When thos scouts come-a-looking, guess who will be there to talk to them.
That's right shorts - DR MULLAN!
This from the Archer web site:
"The NILVAD consortium consists of 17 participating institutions based in ten different European Union member states as well as Archer Pharmaceuticals......The European Commission funds NILVAD for five years and 6 million Euros, through the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) "
Archer generated extensive preclinical data on Nilvadipine across a wide range of laboratory models, supporting its candidacy as a multi-modal Alzheimer’s therapeutic. As a partner in the NILVAD consortium, Archer also provided the preclinical and clinical data required for a successful Phase III Clinical Trial application under the EU’s FP7 funding programme, contributing directly to the creation of the NILVAD Programme we are all part of today.
Imagine that, contributed directly.
Just imagine the extensive contacts Dr Mullan has established thru the Nilvadpine project leading to the phase III trial.
Who thinks Dr Mullan will not be able to use those contacts to benefit Star?
What makes you think I didn't know MORON?
You are avoiding the obvious. So who convinced the sponsor to spend the bucks on this trial of Archer's drug?
Think about that MORON.
How many of those Phase III trials you speak of, "with much better reputations than Mullen (by the way, it's Dr Mullan you MORON) have positive results?
So who is helping to fund the Nilvadipine Phase III trial?
Who is helping to fund the clinical trials?
Do you think Dr Mullan had anything to do with any of that genius?
Has Dr Mullan found a teaming partner?
Given Dr Mullan's reputation and contacts via the Archer Phase III trial in Europe, my guess is Dr Mullan can easily find teaming partners.
With only 606 shareholders of record as of Nov, and possibly less now, this only highlights all of the cross trading.
I also expect some news will be released in the days before the investor conference. What better way to attract institutional interest?
"There are not many real shares for sale and definitely not 24 million."
Assuming there are still 606 Shareholders of Record as back in Nov, which I doubt, that would mean each shareholder would have to cough up 39,604 shares PER SHAREHOLDER.
That is Ridiculous!
You are right, there are not many real shares available for sale which is why the Shorts are so worried about the upcoming Investor Conference.
When you exclude very large individual shareholders like JW, how many retail investors are left?
Retail investors is the target group of the shorts. All the FUD and scare tactics is targeted at them.
I think this stock is in very strong hands right now which is why the shorts are so nervous.
If the weak retail longs are gone, who is going to sell so the shorts can cover?
My understanding is if you own actual shares of a stock, held in a brokerage account or similar, you are most certainly a shareholder a record and have the right to vote those shares as a shareholder of record recognized by the company. Typically, the brokerage will forward any proxy and voting statements unless instructed otherwise.
My understanding is if you are a shareholder in a mutual fund (or similar type fund), where that fund invests in multiple stocks, individual shareholders in that mutual fund are not counted as a shareholder of record for the purposes of voting rights. In essence, as a shareholder of the mutual fund, you have delegated the voting rights to the fund managers.
The Nov 2013 Proxy showed ONLY 606 shareholders of record, which is combination of retail and institutional shareholders.
My guess is, in early Jan there were fewer than 606 shareholders of record due to nervous longs but in the background we learned later that BlackRock was taking a large position.
The Shorts still don’t want to answer that question.
The reason I believe Anatabloc is potentially more valuable than Nilvadipine is because Anatabloc potentially addresses more markets. For example, Anatabloc may also address the Rosacea market. It will be interesting to see those clinical trial results.
None of that explains why Dr. Mullan took the CEO job at Star which obviously requires a great deal of his time. Short bashers like you don't want to admit the obvious which is Dr Mullan must see great potential in Anatabloc or he would not have taken the job nor waist his time.
My guess is we will learn in just a few days later this month why Dr Mullan is so optimistic.
Your hypothetical that Archer can always take him back if STSI fails, is just plain stupid and illogical.
So you value Archer at 80/20 over Rockcreek?
Which opens the obvious question, why would Dr Mullan leave the duties at Archer to run over and be CEO of Star which is worthless based on your analysis?
I am still amazed there were only 606 shareholders of record back in Nov, and this was before the FDA news which did not seem to affect Blackrock.
It would sure be nice to know how many shareholders of record we have today but my guess is we have more bigger players like Blackrock trying to take lager positions given the volume and stock price recently.
I am not expecting any real FDA news in the near future. Looks like that process is going to take some time to work out and Star has already stated they don't plan to say much as the process proceeds, but I am expecting some good news at the upcoming investor conference.
I think the hiring of strategy guy to work with wall street was brilliant.
In my opinion, the announcement of just one partner, in just one target area (like rosacea for example) will totally change the way wall street views the potential of this company.
Dr Mullan didn't agree to become CEO imho if he didn't see enormous opportunity. I think the upcoming investor conference will help highlight why Dr Mullan took the job.