popps, Much of Geert's career was based on value adding the the IP of J&J then selling it off, just as he did with barrier. All of which was based on dermatology. He also knows where to go with it.
His managers also have a proven track record in bringing companies to point of sale, Pavco in particular. Include the decades of experience on the BOD and Frost (to any point in which he may be involved), also with a background in dermatology, all lead me to think that they know exactly how to progress RXI.
No substitute for experience..........GL
It may not confirm, but I deduce that considering the tiny staff, lack of any manufacturing and sales, along with Geert's age,(mid sixties), it is my strong guess that his energies will be directed on just that if they can grow a desirable IP inventory.
Add to that the shopping spree at present of bigger pharma co's to add to their dwindling pipelines lead me to think this is RXI's most probable and perhaps prudent intent.......GL
As he has successfully demonstrated with J&J and Barrier, Dr.C's goal has been and continues to focus on adding value to companies. No doubt the intention is for RXI to be acquired at some point in time. The agreement with Hapten confirms my thought.............GLTA
Thanks autumn. why couldn't management have put the two PR's together. As good as I think Geert is, he has a bad habit of leaving everybody scratching their heads...............GL
No weeping, no gnashing. Reality, time, and money setting in, no more no less...........GL
Yes hanna, I think they would. The technology advances exponentially, you follow for sure. Beginning to think Tang and Frost gave Geert a shot at it to see what he could do. Well, we're not over yet, but it seems he is not impressing as yet................GL
"When treatment with RXI-109 was initiated 2-weeks post scar revision surgery, blinded evaluators were able to identify accurately the RXI-109 treated site at the 3-month follow-up more frequently (54%) than when treatment was initiated immediately post scar revision surgery (24%) (p
Agree, but why put out an unimpressive report on p2 progress just for the sake of putting out a PR?
Makes no sense. They must view the progress differently. Therein lies the problem of lack of communication and explanation....................just a thought..............GLTA
many posters interpreted Geert,s PR as luke warm at best. I cannot figure out why he would. This begs a question; is it possible that the company views this interim result quite differently than many here seem to?
Why would he put out a message that ran the risk of being viewed negatively? He viewed these interim result most positive, just as he has stated. I can only defer to his opinion here along with his reasons for stating them today.
Either that or the company just may be totally inept at IR ...........GLA
thanks hanna. will the tests be more revealing in time, as the treated site prohibits scarring as intended why the untreated site scar continues to develop?
What is time frame for a scar to fully develop?
Mgmt cannot and will not state confirmation of p2. The trials are ongoing. I feel today's PR was put out as an update on September's PR after nearly two months without any news whatsoever. Not overly excitable I agree, but what can one expect when the trials are still ongoing? A note to shareholders that things are still on track is how I view today's news.
We're not going to get hyped up or exaggerated comments from this company and I for one can appreciate that. GLTA
good point #$%$. add to that a thorough explanation of the benefits that an anti scarring drug could provide along with the estimated population it could address.
Clearly management is lacking in this department. Perhaps this is the reason why there is little interest by the public?..........GL