I totally understand everyone's frustration. Nad
Post# of 154899
(Total Views: 405)
Posted On: 09/06/2019 12:21:19 PM
I totally understand everyone's frustration.
Nader, IMO has done ONE bad things, and recently, if I understand doing it less. That could have been the reason for all this PPS and frustrations.
He style, is to getting excited, and publicly announce them. I have learned, that this doesn't work. We should only announce stuff after major milestones, OR we have the answer to nail every single question.
So, if he comes out and say, we did get Phase 2 for Cancer that I'd be super excited, as opposed to say we are going to do this, we are in the progress in doing that.
BUT Why does it make a difference?
If you play open everyone knows, what is coming, and they can assess the risk on NOT being on the train.
As opposed to, we don't know what is coming, and we be caught off guard.
So everyone including analyst CANNOT see what is coming. (By analyst, I mean real ones, just a bunch of high school kids)
I noticed recently we getting into that process. To get the thing done, and then announce it, or we should have a clear vision on everything, if announcing it upfront. The latter has to be flawless.
But back to your question:
You and major shareholder have chosen Board, and Nader indirectly to make the decisions. Just because he comes and tells stuff, doesn't mean he needs anyone's feedback. I wouldn't have done it in the first place.
Nader, IMO has done ONE bad things, and recently, if I understand doing it less. That could have been the reason for all this PPS and frustrations.
He style, is to getting excited, and publicly announce them. I have learned, that this doesn't work. We should only announce stuff after major milestones, OR we have the answer to nail every single question.
So, if he comes out and say, we did get Phase 2 for Cancer that I'd be super excited, as opposed to say we are going to do this, we are in the progress in doing that.
BUT Why does it make a difference?
If you play open everyone knows, what is coming, and they can assess the risk on NOT being on the train.
As opposed to, we don't know what is coming, and we be caught off guard.
So everyone including analyst CANNOT see what is coming. (By analyst, I mean real ones, just a bunch of high school kids)
I noticed recently we getting into that process. To get the thing done, and then announce it, or we should have a clear vision on everything, if announcing it upfront. The latter has to be flawless.
But back to your question:
You and major shareholder have chosen Board, and Nader indirectly to make the decisions. Just because he comes and tells stuff, doesn't mean he needs anyone's feedback. I wouldn't have done it in the first place.
(0)
(0)