There might be a problem with this trend. A lot of patients might decline to participate in cancer trials. They will wait for the 'cure' instead of risking a placebo.
I don't mean to be sarcastic, but if we rely on optimism running amok, in 10 years we might even cure death.
Hard to prevent some abuse at the fringe, but gross abuse will trigger fiduciary responsibilities. I voted no to expand the number of available incentive shares and lost, but that's something I can live with. The no votes were sizable enough to remind the BOD of their responsibilities.
Above is title of a very good article at Seeking Alpha. Finally, a writer recognizes the unique luxuries in turning around a company which has a humongous balance sheet.
No one called me about voting. I voted and my confirmation came with correct records of my votes. my key vote was NO on increasing incentive shares by 10 million.
Based on K's slip in referring to DL as CEO in yesterday introduction, I think Dan will at least take over as interim if not immediately permanent in case of emergency. In terms of successor plan, K is doing a great job.
She's only a BOD member, a part time advisor. Important but not a day to day exec. A big part of the NDA is showing manufacturing capability, reliability and quality of products. So far the company does not have any issue with supplies for trials. A good sign that they have a process in place.
I wonder if they know the interim count of this vote so far. I sure hope the decision will be a resounding NO. They still have enough shares from past authorization for incentive grants. They need to improve governance before asking owners for more. In any case this settlement sets the company on a better path and it would definitely help me to swallow a defeat on this issue.
What my friend meant was that that case was not part of a planned presentation by the company. It's an impromptu from a bystander like himself.