“News based on 4/5/24 - Summary of Naders exp
Post# of 153886
(Total Views: 695)
Posted On: 04/24/2024 3:08:54 PM
“News based on 4/5/24 -
Summary of Naders experts / arguments:
Prof Dave Denis - “is the author of over 50 published articles in leading peer-reviewed journals on topics related to corporate governance, corporate financial policies, corporate organizational structure, corporate valuation, and entrepreneurial finance.”
Sounds like he’s basically not sure why Naders actions led to this allegation, based on his expertise.
Mr. Carl Seiden, Prof. - “…highly-regarded pharmaceutical industry securities analyst employed by Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., JPMorgan Equity Research, and UBS Securities. Former Executive Bristol-Myers Squibb Executive.”
Sounds like he’s saying a reasonable investor doesn’t rely on what a CEO says; reasonable investors rely on “total mix” of publicly available information. (I agree.)
Professor John Macey - “Yale Law School. Sam Harris Professor of Corporate Law, Corporate Finance, and Securities Law Yale School of Management”
Sounds like he’s saying Naders actions are normal and they were disclosed.
Dr. Robbins - “(40 years) experience in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries,
including at CROs [contract research organizations] overseeing the clinical, regulatory, and quality assurance aspects relevant to a company's incentives and challenges in bringing innovative and
generic drug products to consumers."
He will testify that ...it was the role and responsibility of Amarex as CytoDyn's CRO and regulatory agent to
communicate with the sponsor and to reject a filing date that would result in a FDA refusal to file and could jeopardize the sponsor's chances to receive FDA approval."
I’m no lawyer, but this quote seems pretty hard for the Government to do.
“The government, not Dr. Pourhassan, has the burden of proving Dr. Pourhassan's intent beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Especially, after the FDA emails (and with more to come around mid July).”
I like Naders team.
Summary of Naders experts / arguments:
Prof Dave Denis - “is the author of over 50 published articles in leading peer-reviewed journals on topics related to corporate governance, corporate financial policies, corporate organizational structure, corporate valuation, and entrepreneurial finance.”
Sounds like he’s basically not sure why Naders actions led to this allegation, based on his expertise.
Mr. Carl Seiden, Prof. - “…highly-regarded pharmaceutical industry securities analyst employed by Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., JPMorgan Equity Research, and UBS Securities. Former Executive Bristol-Myers Squibb Executive.”
Sounds like he’s saying a reasonable investor doesn’t rely on what a CEO says; reasonable investors rely on “total mix” of publicly available information. (I agree.)
Professor John Macey - “Yale Law School. Sam Harris Professor of Corporate Law, Corporate Finance, and Securities Law Yale School of Management”
Sounds like he’s saying Naders actions are normal and they were disclosed.
Dr. Robbins - “(40 years) experience in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries,
including at CROs [contract research organizations] overseeing the clinical, regulatory, and quality assurance aspects relevant to a company's incentives and challenges in bringing innovative and
generic drug products to consumers."
He will testify that ...it was the role and responsibility of Amarex as CytoDyn's CRO and regulatory agent to
communicate with the sponsor and to reject a filing date that would result in a FDA refusal to file and could jeopardize the sponsor's chances to receive FDA approval."
I’m no lawyer, but this quote seems pretty hard for the Government to do.
“The government, not Dr. Pourhassan, has the burden of proving Dr. Pourhassan's intent beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Especially, after the FDA emails (and with more to come around mid July).”
I like Naders team.
(7)
(0)