Lol. I agree that both are non binding. The poin
Post# of 153935
(Total Views: 344)
Posted On: 02/12/2020 1:11:15 PM
Lol. I agree that both are non binding. The point that I am trying to make is that I was expecting to see some numbers. Which admittedly I was surprised that they would be able to come up with numbers so quickly.
It makes sense that they did a letter of intent, as they dont yet know what the numbers will look like.
Point being, NP could have just as easily said we have signed a letter of intent to begin studying Lero for coronavirus and possibly oncology in the future. At this point no terms have been agreed upon.
Which is still an interesting development, just not really very significant.
However, a non binding agreement (which infers terms) would have been more significant. While still not binding, it would have given us the ability to see what could be coming in the next month or two if/when the deal was finalized.
A letter of intent to study this for coronavirus is really not very meaningful. No more meaningful than studying this for MS for example.
It makes sense that they did a letter of intent, as they dont yet know what the numbers will look like.
Point being, NP could have just as easily said we have signed a letter of intent to begin studying Lero for coronavirus and possibly oncology in the future. At this point no terms have been agreed upon.
Which is still an interesting development, just not really very significant.
However, a non binding agreement (which infers terms) would have been more significant. While still not binding, it would have given us the ability to see what could be coming in the next month or two if/when the deal was finalized.
A letter of intent to study this for coronavirus is really not very meaningful. No more meaningful than studying this for MS for example.
(1)
(0)