InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 2018
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/19/2006

Re: davidal66 post# 396

Saturday, 07/23/2016 12:22:58 AM

Saturday, July 23, 2016 12:22:58 AM

Post# of 2099
Due Diligence on the short case for VBLT and my response: Part four.

A final point and question to the board.

Yes, biotech's can be sketchy and shady. But would Harvard simply fudge data or massage it to please VBLT. Is the reputation of Harvard scientists really so important that they want to please VBLT's management? It's not like VBLT really has anything to offer a Harvard oncologist. Maybe AMGN or Biogen or AZN, but VBLT? That's not an argument that VB-111 works and the skeptics are wrong; it's just that Harvard has nothing to gain from ginning up/massaging/fudging data to please an Israeli micro cap running on fumes. The same can be said for the KOL talk on glioblastoma a few months ago; does a top drawer neuro oncologist really care to talk up VB-111 just to please a rinky-dink biotech?

Question to the board. I would love some feedback on my thoughts on the short thesis for VB-111. Where is my analysis right or wrong. Thanks and have a great weekend. david
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent VBLT News