Personally - I viewed the call as positive. I unde
Post# of 153851
(Total Views: 510)
Posted On: 07/24/2023 9:03:36 PM
Personally - I viewed the call as positive. I understand the long term investor frustration but putting emotions & timeframe aside-
-Amarex seems to be moving in the right direction and could really be a huge boost to the company financial situation (i.e. Game changer, leverage in negotiations going forward, etc.)
-HIV may indeed still be on the table as mightycydy's post(s) suggest - even if it isn't, the FDA is seeing real testimonials from a slate of qualified experts and HIV advocates as to the value and safety of the drug - helping both to repair the reputation of the company/drug + prospects of hold-lift
-NASH is in the crosshairs and it will be done right, with a partner, and is just the first step in the many indications for LL
Overall I feel WAY more confident (as Tanya Urbach stated on the call - best leadership / scientific team in place in years and years) in the sensible approach the company is taking now. Antonio said it well that changes and positive outcomes are the result of many slow & steady steps in the correct direction cumulatively.
Again, frustration(s) aside, it certainly sounds like a very promising investment at 25c given the risk/reward equation from here. Many companies with fewer indications but promising drugs or platforms have been taken out at 15-20bn once they have a modicum of proof of concept behind them...imagine we hit NASH and then show what we know we can in oncology? 2-3 proven indications b/w NASH & Oncology & HIV (cure?) and we are 40-50bn. Worth a shot at 25c imo. Let the bidding wars begin...
QUESTION: NASH preclinical study was mentioned - does anyone know the typical timeframe for these? Is this something that can be completed in 6 months? 1 year? longer/shorter?
-Amarex seems to be moving in the right direction and could really be a huge boost to the company financial situation (i.e. Game changer, leverage in negotiations going forward, etc.)
-HIV may indeed still be on the table as mightycydy's post(s) suggest - even if it isn't, the FDA is seeing real testimonials from a slate of qualified experts and HIV advocates as to the value and safety of the drug - helping both to repair the reputation of the company/drug + prospects of hold-lift
-NASH is in the crosshairs and it will be done right, with a partner, and is just the first step in the many indications for LL
Overall I feel WAY more confident (as Tanya Urbach stated on the call - best leadership / scientific team in place in years and years) in the sensible approach the company is taking now. Antonio said it well that changes and positive outcomes are the result of many slow & steady steps in the correct direction cumulatively.
Again, frustration(s) aside, it certainly sounds like a very promising investment at 25c given the risk/reward equation from here. Many companies with fewer indications but promising drugs or platforms have been taken out at 15-20bn once they have a modicum of proof of concept behind them...imagine we hit NASH and then show what we know we can in oncology? 2-3 proven indications b/w NASH & Oncology & HIV (cure?) and we are 40-50bn. Worth a shot at 25c imo. Let the bidding wars begin...
QUESTION: NASH preclinical study was mentioned - does anyone know the typical timeframe for these? Is this something that can be completed in 6 months? 1 year? longer/shorter?
(6)
(0)