There are all kinds of reasons why there's been no communication from the company.

Here's one:
if you were actually negotiating a deal, would you prefer the Nader-style "we have interest and are hopeful we'll have a partner" or would you prefer that someone makes a deal before talking about it?

Here's another:
If you were knowledgeable about past disasters other companies have had -- not to mention CYDY itself -- would you rush results out before analyzing them in every possible way -- or would you release data that might not reflect the true efficacy of the drug? For instance, what if it has results that vary greatly from patient to patient? Wouldn't you want to find out if there was one population for which it worked well, and another population for which it was not likely to work, so that you could present these findings in the positive light that it deserved? What if dividing the results by certain factors showed that it had great efficacy on that one group -- do you want those results to be lost in the overall statistics, or do you want that to be part of the first data release, not a second PR which would trigger another "look they're changing the endpoints again" tweet from AF?