Kat--Appreciate your post on the "radio silence." Like you, I think our patience will be amply rewarded. But I suspect the extended nature of the negotiations probably have a lot to do with the uniqueness of the mab itself--the various indications it can address, the difference in price-point for life-saving drugs (think cancer) versus more maintenance kind of uses (say HIV or AD). And hanging over any potential deal out there, for any of the indications, is the long-acting version under development. What Pharma Co would sign a deal for weekly leronlimab when a longer-acting version is just a few years away?

I also don't think Jacob Lalezari is a "normal" CEO--in other words, he's not just in it for the money. So I think "the vision thing" should be part of the discussion--how does Dr Lalezari want to develop the drug? I don't know how it plays out, but he is the current Vice President of the Board and founding member of NP2, a non-profit Pharma Co whose mission is to reduce the price of generic cancer drugs whose prices have skyrocketed in recent years. I don't think he is going to let his role at NP2 interfere with his fiduciary responsibility to shareholders--I hope not! But I think his humanity will guide--is guiding--some of the decisions that lie ahead.

I can't think of any other drug out there, when it is approved, that can be used for multiple life-saving indications as well as multiple chronic indications. How does one go about pricing leronlimab for a cancer cure--as the recent press release on mTNBC suggests--when it will also be used weekly for inflammation-related indications? Can you price the same drug differently for different indications? If it's priced like a cancer drug, any off-label use would be prohibitive. So I suspect any Big Pharma out there would have to consider these kind of issues when negotiating with Cytodyn. And that's why I'm fine being patient. And I love all this preclinical work and the upcoming clinical trials--we need more hard evidence about leronlimab's MOA and utility in various indications. Even if it takes longer than we might hope.

Personally, I'd like to see Cytodyn partner with someone for one of the inflammation-related indications. (Pick one! Several to choose...). That, along with Gates Foundation money for the HIV cure, would give us enough cash to aggressively go after the cancer indications. And then hand off leronlimab to NP2 when the weekly version of leronlimab goes generic. And we keep the long-acting version for ourselves. And any gene-therapy applications too.

Hey, I'm not a medical professional, or a lawyer or a Wall Street guy. I did go to art school, though, and I'm well-trained to think big, and think creatively. Kat's post was quite thoughtful and detailed, and inspired me to riff off on the above-related concerns, which have been rambling around in my noggin a while now. I'd love to hear any responses from doctors and lawyers and people in the business. And one final thought--when I think about Dr Lalezari, the old saw about TR comes to mind--Speak softly but carry a big stick. To any Cytodyn stockholder, I'd say Lalezari should "Speak softly, and carry a laptop full of unimpeachable data." Not quite as poetic, but appropriate to our situation.

At the risk of sounding like Colombo--you know, "Just one more thing"... I'd like to express my gratitude to the Board and the mods. I feel like I could sit down with any of you here and have a good, reasonable conversation. And remain civil throughout. Can't say that about any other stock message board! Thanks everyone.