"Finally, and this is purely my opinion, the compa
Post# of 36564
(Total Views: 389)
Posted On: 01/02/2021 12:50:31 PM
"Finally, and this is purely my opinion, the company's goals need to be pared back. Partnerships have to carefully vetted. After all these years it is not clear to me if the lead horse in the stable is vaccines, a diabetes franchise, an MSO, a pharmaceutical company (Altucell and Excellagen), or a conglomeration of all of these."
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=600...z6iPb4vOQM
Seems to me that Joe has laid this out previously - NGIO will be the lead player with Ii-key/AE37 so they will focus on the vaccines and cancer treatments. GNBT will be a holding company that will manage the MSO, with a focus on diabetes/wound care. The reason everything is blurred right now is because NGIO is still part of GNBT - the spin off should establish much clearer boundaries as to each company's focus.
A 2021 "state of company" CC is likely coming within the next couple of weeks. Didn't Todd tell one of our posters that it was being planned? I think Joe just realized the holidays aren't much of a time to hold one - or maybe he was waiting on initiatives he is aware of to conclude so that they could be brought into the discussion.
A realistic downside to this type of CC is you are inevitably going to get folks demanding a time frame for each of Joe's comments regarding the various initiatives, and that leads to two possible bad outcomes. If Joe offers generous time lines so he knows he is likely to achieve them (under promise and over deliver), then the nay-sayers yell it should be done faster. If he offers tighter time lines based on a optimistic outcome, and then those time frames are not met (over promise and under deliver), Joe is attacked for failing to produce. You can see both of these opposing attacks every day on this board, which is probably the most favorable to GNBT. Do I even need to mention the outrage on some of the other GNBT boards we are all aware of?
As Buildit stated a couple of weeks ago, those types of accusations create a negative atmosphere surrounding the company and Joe's efforts to anybody using these boards to educate themselves on GNBT/NGIO for investment purposes. If this were a quantifiable process like building a bridge, I could understand the push back. But this is an amorphous process of developing something that has never been done before, which also relies on outside agencies (SEC, FDA, foreign partners) that GNBT does not control to support the effort. So time lines are best estimates at best, and just optimistic guesses at worst.
I'd be in favor of Joe just stating what was in the hopper being worked on, and each time somebody asked him "when?", his response would be "as quickly as possible based on all the participating groups." Probably won't satisfy the questioner, but it is the most honest response that can be given.
Read More: https://investorshangout.com/post/view?id=600...z6iPb4vOQM
Seems to me that Joe has laid this out previously - NGIO will be the lead player with Ii-key/AE37 so they will focus on the vaccines and cancer treatments. GNBT will be a holding company that will manage the MSO, with a focus on diabetes/wound care. The reason everything is blurred right now is because NGIO is still part of GNBT - the spin off should establish much clearer boundaries as to each company's focus.
A 2021 "state of company" CC is likely coming within the next couple of weeks. Didn't Todd tell one of our posters that it was being planned? I think Joe just realized the holidays aren't much of a time to hold one - or maybe he was waiting on initiatives he is aware of to conclude so that they could be brought into the discussion.
A realistic downside to this type of CC is you are inevitably going to get folks demanding a time frame for each of Joe's comments regarding the various initiatives, and that leads to two possible bad outcomes. If Joe offers generous time lines so he knows he is likely to achieve them (under promise and over deliver), then the nay-sayers yell it should be done faster. If he offers tighter time lines based on a optimistic outcome, and then those time frames are not met (over promise and under deliver), Joe is attacked for failing to produce. You can see both of these opposing attacks every day on this board, which is probably the most favorable to GNBT. Do I even need to mention the outrage on some of the other GNBT boards we are all aware of?
As Buildit stated a couple of weeks ago, those types of accusations create a negative atmosphere surrounding the company and Joe's efforts to anybody using these boards to educate themselves on GNBT/NGIO for investment purposes. If this were a quantifiable process like building a bridge, I could understand the push back. But this is an amorphous process of developing something that has never been done before, which also relies on outside agencies (SEC, FDA, foreign partners) that GNBT does not control to support the effort. So time lines are best estimates at best, and just optimistic guesses at worst.
I'd be in favor of Joe just stating what was in the hopper being worked on, and each time somebody asked him "when?", his response would be "as quickly as possible based on all the participating groups." Probably won't satisfy the questioner, but it is the most honest response that can be given.
(8)
(0)