I think the SEC was probably valid, but the method

I think the SEC was probably valid, but the methodology is one that in the past the SEC would never have used, but remember their's a new Sheriff in town. I've seen things from the Federal Govt that I never thought were possible.

As for the price the stock could go to this year, much will depend on what the company says about new partnerships this year. The up front payments on partnerships could be so high that they drive the stock well into dollars, but that might not be the case.

As I see it, if the company drives for big up front payments, they must agree to lower royalty percentages. In the long run they should make more on higher royalty figures, but they'll certainly want something up front. If investors are impressed by the agreements, share price should move up either way.

I still believe that partnerships are pending potential partners seeing at least some of the trial results. I cannot say if different partners might be selected for different products in the same area. If someone is discussing all rights for California, they might want to see at least preliminary data from both the cream and sublingual tablets before paying what's asked for making such a partnership. I believe the company is quite sure their drugs will work safely for the condition''s they're aimed at, but their confidence needs to be backed up with data if they want top dollar in creating partnerships. I'm perfectly happy with them waiting awhile longer, but it would take way too long if potential partners wanted to wait for FDA drug approval. I still believe the intent is to put product on cannabis store shelves sometime this year.

Gary