Upon first glance they released info they likely h
Post# of 148065
(Total Views: 660)
Posted On: 08/14/2021 1:10:39 PM
Upon first glance they released info they likely had to, and buried it in what looked like the same form.
“Although the Company has blamed the FDA for restricting the number of doses to 2, it seems unlikely that the FDA would have refused a trial with additional shots, given that the FDA approved more doses for EIND patients (treated weeks before the mid-April 2020 start dates of CD10 and CD12) and subsequently up to 8 doses for far less critical “long hauler” patients. No communication has ever been shared by the Company showing this restriction in dosing.”
Does anyone here remember the company blaming the FDA? No, but it was said they asked for 4 doses. In fact, why even bash management with a lie and then take it back by saying the company never communicated it? Is this just creative bashing that not only wastes the time of shareholders, but likely deters new investors away because they’re confused?
“Dr. Pourhassan’s and Dr. Kelly’s tenures at CYDY have been marked by a consistent failure to meet FDA expectations leading to a poor and unsalvageable relationship.”
Many longs felt FDAGuidance news is what Longs have been waiting for and they felt it should have shot up $5 minimum. It didn’t. Which begs to question who sold that day? Who shorted?
Did the names on page 17 not in the 5-7% sell that day?
LL is still on a faster track than most approved drugs despite everything.
Didn’t CytoDyn just PR 43 mins prior to this SEC filing that they just received guidance?
Guidance: “advice or information aimed at resolving a problem….”
Relationship: “the way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are CONNECTED, or the state of being connected”
If there was an unsalvageable relationship, there wouldn’t be guidance, or connection.
“The entire expense of soliciting proxies is being borne by CCTV. Costs of this solicitation of proxies are currently estimated to be approximately $3 million. “…. “CCTV may seek reimbursement from the Company of all expenses it incurs in connection with this solicitation but does not intend to submit the question of such reimbursement to a vote of security holders of the Company.”
They basically leave open the possibility (in my opinion) *highly likely* expense of share holders. Remember, they believe in technicalities so much. So making CytoDyn pay for them may not be their “INTENT” but they might likely do it anyway.
Pg 12 “In the event the Investor Group is successful in electing a Board Majority at the Annual Meeting, a change of control under the Employment Agreements would be triggered. Under the Employment Agreements, if the executive officer’s employment is terminated under certain circumstances within twelve (12) months following a change in control of the Company, (i) the executive officer will, in full discharge of all of the Company’s obligations to the executive officer, be entitled to receive change in control payments and severance payments equal to the sum of eighteen months of base salary, and (ii) all outstanding stock options and other awards shall vest and (if applicable) become immediately exercisable, unless otherwise provided in an award agreement (for total severance benefits of approximately $6.0 million for the Company’s three named executive officers, as disclosed by the Company in its proxy statement for the annual meeting held in 2020). “
…”Accordingly, we are unable to estimate actual change in control payments and severance payments, which may be significantly higher than the amount we have presented here.”
*On Pg 17: The following persons are “Gifting Persons” as such term is used in this proxy statement:*
Then it continues to list the names that are COINCIDENTALLY the same names as CYDY/Management bashers on YMB.
Let’s not forget that Melissa Yaeger was a gifting person but doesn’t buy 1 share of CytoDyn. Has she ever cared to support Leronlimab? Did she ever write to FDA to advance Leronlimab?
“I published a paper in 1997 showing CCR5 goes down while on anti-retrovirals so 350 mg should be plenty! Just need someone who knows HIV to explain it! Further viral load should not be the outcome-CD4 count should since LL does inhibit HIV #incelldx”
Is he referring to himself and IncellDx as I? One entity? Incelldx was founded in 2009.
Why did “IncellDx” decide to patent CCL5/RANTES, only after “BP” worked with LL?
https://apnews.com/press-release/business-wir...1ca3dbb0ba
“My point is-it should be approved at 350 mg with stat sig because CCR5 is so low on cells while on anti-retroviral drugs!! More is not better.”
It seems as though the goal of theirs is to COMBO LL WITH another drug.
For instance:
CytoDyn Issues a Press Release:
“CytoDyn and FDA Will Meet to Potentially Finalize Protocol for Pivotal Monotherapy Trial for Leronlimab” -June 7th, 2019
https://www.cytodyn.com/investors/news-events...e-protocol
Paul sold 200k that day when it was about 39c
Again, there seems to be a history of manipulation, delays, projection, weirdly timed PR dumps (Citron hit included), and FUD on msg boards when LL shows it’s true strength.
“Although the Company has blamed the FDA for restricting the number of doses to 2, it seems unlikely that the FDA would have refused a trial with additional shots, given that the FDA approved more doses for EIND patients (treated weeks before the mid-April 2020 start dates of CD10 and CD12) and subsequently up to 8 doses for far less critical “long hauler” patients. No communication has ever been shared by the Company showing this restriction in dosing.”
Does anyone here remember the company blaming the FDA? No, but it was said they asked for 4 doses. In fact, why even bash management with a lie and then take it back by saying the company never communicated it? Is this just creative bashing that not only wastes the time of shareholders, but likely deters new investors away because they’re confused?
“Dr. Pourhassan’s and Dr. Kelly’s tenures at CYDY have been marked by a consistent failure to meet FDA expectations leading to a poor and unsalvageable relationship.”
Many longs felt FDAGuidance news is what Longs have been waiting for and they felt it should have shot up $5 minimum. It didn’t. Which begs to question who sold that day? Who shorted?
Did the names on page 17 not in the 5-7% sell that day?
LL is still on a faster track than most approved drugs despite everything.
Didn’t CytoDyn just PR 43 mins prior to this SEC filing that they just received guidance?
Guidance: “advice or information aimed at resolving a problem….”
Relationship: “the way in which two or more concepts, objects, or people are CONNECTED, or the state of being connected”
If there was an unsalvageable relationship, there wouldn’t be guidance, or connection.
“The entire expense of soliciting proxies is being borne by CCTV. Costs of this solicitation of proxies are currently estimated to be approximately $3 million. “…. “CCTV may seek reimbursement from the Company of all expenses it incurs in connection with this solicitation but does not intend to submit the question of such reimbursement to a vote of security holders of the Company.”
They basically leave open the possibility (in my opinion) *highly likely* expense of share holders. Remember, they believe in technicalities so much. So making CytoDyn pay for them may not be their “INTENT” but they might likely do it anyway.
Pg 12 “In the event the Investor Group is successful in electing a Board Majority at the Annual Meeting, a change of control under the Employment Agreements would be triggered. Under the Employment Agreements, if the executive officer’s employment is terminated under certain circumstances within twelve (12) months following a change in control of the Company, (i) the executive officer will, in full discharge of all of the Company’s obligations to the executive officer, be entitled to receive change in control payments and severance payments equal to the sum of eighteen months of base salary, and (ii) all outstanding stock options and other awards shall vest and (if applicable) become immediately exercisable, unless otherwise provided in an award agreement (for total severance benefits of approximately $6.0 million for the Company’s three named executive officers, as disclosed by the Company in its proxy statement for the annual meeting held in 2020). “
…”Accordingly, we are unable to estimate actual change in control payments and severance payments, which may be significantly higher than the amount we have presented here.”
*On Pg 17: The following persons are “Gifting Persons” as such term is used in this proxy statement:*
Then it continues to list the names that are COINCIDENTALLY the same names as CYDY/Management bashers on YMB.
Let’s not forget that Melissa Yaeger was a gifting person but doesn’t buy 1 share of CytoDyn. Has she ever cared to support Leronlimab? Did she ever write to FDA to advance Leronlimab?
“I published a paper in 1997 showing CCR5 goes down while on anti-retrovirals so 350 mg should be plenty! Just need someone who knows HIV to explain it! Further viral load should not be the outcome-CD4 count should since LL does inhibit HIV #incelldx”
Is he referring to himself and IncellDx as I? One entity? Incelldx was founded in 2009.
Why did “IncellDx” decide to patent CCL5/RANTES, only after “BP” worked with LL?
https://apnews.com/press-release/business-wir...1ca3dbb0ba
“My point is-it should be approved at 350 mg with stat sig because CCR5 is so low on cells while on anti-retroviral drugs!! More is not better.”
It seems as though the goal of theirs is to COMBO LL WITH another drug.
For instance:
CytoDyn Issues a Press Release:
“CytoDyn and FDA Will Meet to Potentially Finalize Protocol for Pivotal Monotherapy Trial for Leronlimab” -June 7th, 2019
https://www.cytodyn.com/investors/news-events...e-protocol
Paul sold 200k that day when it was about 39c
Again, there seems to be a history of manipulation, delays, projection, weirdly timed PR dumps (Citron hit included), and FUD on msg boards when LL shows it’s true strength.
(10)
(0)CytoDyn Inc (CYDY) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼