Not a flattering article for NP. Some of the claim
Post# of 148174
(Total Views: 875)
Posted On: 09/17/2020 9:05:57 PM
Re: nicehedges #56709
Not a flattering article for NP. Some of the claims from those who were formerly part of CYDY sound familiar and I tend to believe them.
“CytoDyn issues a steady stream of press releases — about 100 so far this year — often highlighting “impressive” and “strong” results. Pourhassan frequently appears on Proactive Investors, a public relations website that charges companies $25,000 a year to sponsor promotional content, according to the Wall Street Journal.”
Can’t get cancer trial enrollment sped up, but we can pump $25K plus into these garbage videos. Maybe CYDY should pay Proactiv with the compensation package stock?
“Trauger, who has worked at two other biotech companies since leaving CytoDyn and as an R&D consultant. He said Pourhassan “tried to dictate everything” and had an unrealistic idea of how quickly FDA approvals could proceed.”
NP has unrealistic FDA timelines? So two patients for a cancer BTD isn’t correct?
“In the lawsuit, Pestell claims Pourhassan “embarked on an effort to retaliate” against him after he raised safety concerns related to a drug application Pourhassan wanted submitted to the FDA.”
Wait, NP rushed an FDA application and errors were present? And it wasn’t the BLA? This is a pattern.
Former board member Dockery said of NP, “He also said that Goldman Sachs Partners Fund, Bain Capital and Ziff Capital Partners chose not to invest in CytoDyn because of Pourhassan.”
I’ve said on this board before that I believe NP has turned down or lost banking and potential licensing deals because of his price and over zealous nature.
So Dr. Pestell got chased out and Dr. BP disagreed with the path forward. What happen with Dr. Lalezari? He’s been absent and he’s no longer on the website? Will NP blame Dr. L for his departure as he blames Dr. P and Dr. BP? There’s a pattern here.
More reasons to vote no on the compensation package.
“CytoDyn issues a steady stream of press releases — about 100 so far this year — often highlighting “impressive” and “strong” results. Pourhassan frequently appears on Proactive Investors, a public relations website that charges companies $25,000 a year to sponsor promotional content, according to the Wall Street Journal.”
Can’t get cancer trial enrollment sped up, but we can pump $25K plus into these garbage videos. Maybe CYDY should pay Proactiv with the compensation package stock?
“Trauger, who has worked at two other biotech companies since leaving CytoDyn and as an R&D consultant. He said Pourhassan “tried to dictate everything” and had an unrealistic idea of how quickly FDA approvals could proceed.”
NP has unrealistic FDA timelines? So two patients for a cancer BTD isn’t correct?
“In the lawsuit, Pestell claims Pourhassan “embarked on an effort to retaliate” against him after he raised safety concerns related to a drug application Pourhassan wanted submitted to the FDA.”
Wait, NP rushed an FDA application and errors were present? And it wasn’t the BLA? This is a pattern.
Former board member Dockery said of NP, “He also said that Goldman Sachs Partners Fund, Bain Capital and Ziff Capital Partners chose not to invest in CytoDyn because of Pourhassan.”
I’ve said on this board before that I believe NP has turned down or lost banking and potential licensing deals because of his price and over zealous nature.
So Dr. Pestell got chased out and Dr. BP disagreed with the path forward. What happen with Dr. Lalezari? He’s been absent and he’s no longer on the website? Will NP blame Dr. L for his departure as he blames Dr. P and Dr. BP? There’s a pattern here.
More reasons to vote no on the compensation package.
(13)
(4)CytoDyn Inc (CYDY) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼