I think the discussion of 13d, MMs, bashing, short

I think the discussion of 13d, MMs, bashing, shorting has dominated the board for awhile. This focus on negatives and the past hiccups plays into the hands of the 13d group and shorters. Although our history has been bumpy, we are here with 5 or 6 indications in our repertoire. This is unique for a small pharma. I would rather discuss future catalysts than continue to dissect the negativity. For me, the patent announcement, the projections of funding thru the end of the year, hiring of executives from other big pharmas, and keeping so many indications moving forward form the basis for an agreement with a big pharma on one of our indications. Collaboration with a big pharma would provide credibility, probably significant upfront revenue and assets to help with FDA paperwork and discussion. I think it would provide a huge jump in pps and cement the current BOD in their positions. I am thinking Merck but don’t have a firm suspicion of the indication.
PS, I know some of my board friends would prefer going it alone. But without a catalyst I see the naysayers keeping the upper hand.