That is a great statement by Paul, and a great catch for emphasis by you itsaboutime...
I'd like to add one more perspective;
If a deal worth celebrating does not happen before the end of 2016 - what we are all hoping for in terms of efficacy and breadth of the Bavi platform simply does not meet our expectations and the spirit conveyed in the scientific explanations of MoA, etc.
By the end of 2016, we will have all necessary data to validate Bavi with Doce, and multiple readings, even if interim, from I/O combos. Contrary to many statements made on this board, I/O trials and combo assessments (positive/negative and discernible trajectory) are now achieved in months and in many cases within trial groups of 2 dozen or less.
The red-herring of testing against an old breed of SOC like Doce is exactly that... a red-herring. If Bavi comes through with 60% + improvement - there's not going to be a single deep-pocketed BP that covertly or overtly jumps into that pool. In addition, NIH and FDA will put pressure on commercializing and further exploring potential of such a performance in related arenas. Let's also not forget - oncology care (for those who can't be cured/significantly helped) is incredibly costly. Solutions that can extend life significantly are now being actively pressed forward by agencies looking to save on medical care costs and long-term outlook related to platform value.
If the excitement has not peaked 15 months from now - we have all mis-interpreted the outcome potential for this wave of engagement options and will be highly disappointed.
I'm with those who very strongly believe, based on data points, that we're going to be in a significantly more positive position in 2016.
I'm very personally invested in the aspect of patient and people impact.
One of my three relatives dealing with the disease passed earlier this week after tough battle with NSCLC. Angel of a woman who, if she diagnosed 2-3 years from now, would have likely had a very different outcome.
Best,
MH
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
