Mkc, your posts hits many of the points and thoughts I have had that have been the source of my frustration. It's hard for a stock to go from 8 to 50 in short order. When Puma had its huge rise it was already in the 50s and had a similar share count as us. Generally, stocks that have significant market values in biotechs generate value along the way, which we haven't done yet. Dan has alluded to ADXS being potentially valued as much as Imclone which was sold for 6.5 billion. He also said in 2013 he envisioned a stock price of 50 by 2015. It's hard to see a path of going from a 300m valuation to 6.5b valuation at the rate we're going when positive data and news to date has not been reflected in our stock price. We have such a high short interest in the company and as you say Dan keeps pumping shares and options to himself. So it begs the question, is he content with a low stock price and now just focused on increasing the value of his own financial position in the company instead of the sharehodler value/stock price since it is an uphill battle with so much short interest and he's reluctant to strike a big deal that would drive the stock price up and make his options strike price higher (or in the case of the Agmen deal do a dilution afterwards to send the stock back down in time for his options printing). I'm not trying to be negative, these are just questions, and objectively speaking if you look at the growth of his financial position in the company at the same time while his shareholders have seen the value of their investment diminish, it begs the questions is (albeit indirectly) is he advancing the company in a way that is not generating shareholder value but he's ok with it because he's generating value for himself. With a true pay for performance incentive system this wouldn't have happened - he would have only seen his financial position grow if shareholders saw theirs grew. As the divergence between the two - the shrinking value of shareholder's investment versus the growth of the value of his stake - has become more apparent, I hope and trust he will do something about it, which is only fair, to see to it that stockholders see value generation by way of stock appreciation because those who bought ADXS across the 200m in his offerings at a weighted average cost of around 12 a share put real money into the company and are down 33% and don't have the luxury to print themselves additional free shares to make their position whole as the stock price has gone down as he has done for himself.
