Attached is another comment to today’s short article on Matinas.
_____________________________________________________________________
WDR:
Thank you for agreeing to delete the erroneous statement in your article regarding GJG's alleged conversion of their preferred stock for common stock. As you now concede, GJG never did this. The retraction of this very significant, but very wrong, "fact" raises serious questions regarding the veracity of your article.
Unfortunately, the alleged conversion of preferred stock by GJG was not the only error in your article. To the contrary, as noted in my earlier comment, there is no evidence to support ANY of the alleged "facts" in your article.
For example, there is no evidence to suggest that GJG is intending to sell some or all of its stock as you suggest. The fact that GJG has held its stock for years, even when the stock was at $4, belies your supposition that a sale is imminent.
Moreover, it would make no sense for GJG to sell its shares at current levels when it did not sell any shares when the price was $4.00. In addition, if GJG were to now dump its shares, and further depress the stock price, it would hurt its investment in this company.
If you speak with GJG, you will likely become convinced it is in this investment for the long haul, that will only terminate when Matinas is bought out by a pharmaceutical company having an interest in its patented encochleation technology.
Nor is there any evidence that supports your erroneous contention that Rutgers ran a failed clinical trial on any of the drugs sold to Matinas.
I challenge you to present any evidence in support of this claim. You will be unable to find such evidence as there were no such trials.
If you have any evidence which supports these, or any of the other "facts" I refuted in my earlier comment, I would ask that you provide such evidence in a responsive comment, or supplemental article.
If you have no evidence to support the alleged facts upon which your article is based, I would respectfully suggest you retract it.
It is one thing to publish an article without any support for the alleged facts upon which the article is based.
It is quite another thing to refuse to retract the article when shown that the facts are wrong.
Please govern yourself accordingly.
LM
