Rock Creek Pharmaceuticals Inc. (fka RCPIQ)

[haysaw]

Article frankly was fine with exception of final sentence...

I can't seem to get past the last line of the article — "To what extent the resignation or the unauthorized response to the FDA will amount to a setback is uncertain, but the episode may suggest that shifting focus requires more than a name change."

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. For example, these facts pointed out in the article reflect transformations implemented at Rock Creek:

— "Jonnie Williams Sr., the former Star Scientific chief executive." (change #1)

— "The very public saga prompted the company [to]...place more emphasis on drug development" (#2)

— "the company proceeded with plans to run a clinical trial in the U.K., according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission" (#3)

— "McDonnell, who joined the board last August" (#4)

— "The FDA responded by continuing the hold on the trial because of “deficiencies” in the response and the board began an independent inquiry into the “premature” response, the filing states" (#5 and unauthorized #6)

What didn't they change (LOL)? In hindsight, the one critical 'non-change', was not getting rid of Chapman. May have spared them the embarrassment of bringing on McDonnell also.