(Total Views: 355)
Posted On: 01/07/2017 4:22:42 PM
Post# of 72444
Thanks to some helpful reminders from trusted sources I can verify that there were mandated holding periods for the initial 8 million and the subsequent 6 million.
Rule 144.
"If the issuer of the securities is, and has been for a period of at least 90 days immediately before the sale, subject to the reporting requirements of section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, a minimum of six months must elapse between the later of the date of the acquisition of the securities from the issuer, or from an affiliate of the issuer, and any resale of such securities in reliance on this section for the account of either the acquiror or any subsequent holder of those securities."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/17/230.144
The initial transfer was August 28 2014 (boy time flies) and it was 8 million shares.
http://archive.fast-edgar.com//20140904/AL22A...AOZ223262/
Almost two years later he still hasn't sold all of the initial transfer and none of the subsequent 6 million. I simply take it to mean what I stated earlier.
The DD I did previously on the matter was sufficient to allay most of my concerns on the matter. (Others are free to disagree).
I have moved on to concerns about drug efficacy/ competition etc. Based on recent DD I feel like I have a decent handle on why trial and trial design/ prioritization have been handled in the manner that they have. For me the main risk is currently drug efficacy at dosages that don't induce safety concerns. It's biotech after all, past trial success doesn't assure future success. Based on what I think I know, I agree with the current strategy. All IMHO.
Rule 144.
"If the issuer of the securities is, and has been for a period of at least 90 days immediately before the sale, subject to the reporting requirements of section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, a minimum of six months must elapse between the later of the date of the acquisition of the securities from the issuer, or from an affiliate of the issuer, and any resale of such securities in reliance on this section for the account of either the acquiror or any subsequent holder of those securities."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/17/230.144
The initial transfer was August 28 2014 (boy time flies) and it was 8 million shares.
http://archive.fast-edgar.com//20140904/AL22A...AOZ223262/
Almost two years later he still hasn't sold all of the initial transfer and none of the subsequent 6 million. I simply take it to mean what I stated earlier.
The DD I did previously on the matter was sufficient to allay most of my concerns on the matter. (Others are free to disagree).
I have moved on to concerns about drug efficacy/ competition etc. Based on recent DD I feel like I have a decent handle on why trial and trial design/ prioritization have been handled in the manner that they have. For me the main risk is currently drug efficacy at dosages that don't induce safety concerns. It's biotech after all, past trial success doesn't assure future success. Based on what I think I know, I agree with the current strategy. All IMHO.
(4)
(0)
