A.) I do not see the further information (experiments) required by the FDA as a negative. Not at all. Any of those so-called experts over yonder that are taking bits and pieces of the FDA published protocol and stats/opinions from other sites have no clue how the system works. Nor have they any idea about what has been exchanged between the FDA and the company. These folk are just haters that love to say "I told ya so". Ignore them.
B.) I do not believe funding for trials will be a result of more dilution. Not entirely, that is. Maybe in part. There is the likelihood of private investors and the possibility of BP funding trials with contingencies. This does happen in the world of biotech.
The above mentioned are not inherent risks in this case. At least not in my opinion, based on what I have discussed, read, mulled, etc., etc.,... there is another risk to shareholders I believe. That is if Koos hasn't had that metamorphosis I have mentioned a few times. If he has, the benefit to those invested, that understand this is science and great successes do not happen overnight, can be incredible. If he hasn't, and he is doing what it looks like he might be, like I said the other day, we as shareholders are going to hurt.
B.) I do not believe funding for trials will be a result of more dilution. Not entirely, that is. Maybe in part. There is the likelihood of private investors and the possibility of BP funding trials with contingencies. This does happen in the world of biotech.
The above mentioned are not inherent risks in this case. At least not in my opinion, based on what I have discussed, read, mulled, etc., etc.,... there is another risk to shareholders I believe. That is if Koos hasn't had that metamorphosis I have mentioned a few times. If he has, the benefit to those invested, that understand this is science and great successes do not happen overnight, can be incredible. If he hasn't, and he is doing what it looks like he might be, like I said the other day, we as shareholders are going to hurt.
