So what's the implication of the $356m deficit?
More likely is that they've not finalized the new protocol with the control group requirements. Why you'd make a connection between starting a Ph 2 trial, patent approval and a sale of the company is baffling.
Not an answer to the question karly
Why would they delay starting a phase 2 trial waiting for a patent decision - especially when rulings from the PTO are not close to predictable? They have many other patent applications outstanding - are they going to delay other clinical or organizational decisions? If you buy a company you buy their IP as well which includes any patent applications that are in process.
They've had issues enrolling patients in the past and now they have a protocol change to deal with - funding could be another issues.
That almost makes it seem like you know what you're talking about - but yet you don't. No one is going to come in and offer even half of current market cap for this company, not even a third. If a deal is every done it will likely be tiered and include milestone payments.
And this flys in the face of all the sycophants that believe all these guys do is milk the company for their own benefit - if that were true why would they want to sell?
So what would anyone offer for this company right now keep? And as I mentioned earlier, if you guys are right and mgmt uses this company as its own little piggy bank, why would they ever sell. Come on, gives us a figure.
They have very little debt zit. So tell us what the significance is to the $356m deficit?
Nothing new there zit. Same boilerplate type language for some time now. Plenty more, more onerous sounding statements in those filings - why not scare everyone with the going concern or no guarantee that the company will be able to raise funds? How about the better funded competition one - oho! Not in any way minimizing the issues for this company but this type of language is nothing new.
Such a bore bearchit - is that enlightening enough for ya?
Bio isn't wrong in his general statement Karly that the deficit isn't a debt that has to be paid as some here suggest - you are also quite wrong that most profitable companies are profitable from nearly day one. Where have you been, under a rock? Likewise, your analogy to burning money is plain stupid - there's a little think called the tax code that helps to mitigate losses while burning money is just that. This company may never make money, but you set no one straight with your little tirade.
Keep, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, any discussion on buying a publicly traded company involves buying the existing shares which are right now $6.24 * the number of outstanding shares. Do the math. I just don't see anyone offering anywhere near that right now. And assuming that the science works there is still a significant investment (Cash) needed to get the first product to market. As I mentioned earlier, a JV would be more likely at some point but even that would likely be tiered due to the investment required.
Can you even read you dip!? That's the point, if there was a JV it would have to be disclosed. Wake up already. And stop the SEC nonsense - makes you look more looney than normal.
Another one for you to delete knucklehead - who is the 'controlling majority' that you reference?