Hi Spidey,
You just want to shrug off pretty much all of my questions regarding management, that's fine. Can't force someone to post. But your statement of "different directions/indications" kind of states my point. They have had many changes that has blown through a substantial amount of cash. Approximately $200 million.
Wouldn't experienced management focus on getting the first one or two indications close to approval, before chasing after any indication they can imagine? The risk they have taken in doing so, has strained their cash position and their ability to do another raise without being slaughtered.
They state the 2 director positions on the Nasdaq, Brainstorm and Solar Energy, this board member has had, is the reason they believe they are a suitable board member. A little vetting on that, would have raised their eyebrows one would think. But they truly are just token appointments, allowing for large bonuses to be approved at will. Puppets. And how many shares and cash have these long term board members been compensated for doing just that? But yes, you're fine with it.
I have never once said Pluristem is dead thank you. But after the decade of missteps, missing of pretty much everything, I can at the very least, understand EichKing's feelings and beliefs to make such a bold statement.
Eight months now since ARS pivotal trial was completed. Yes you said they have to get it all just right. At what point should we start to worry. A year, year and a half, 2 years? Again comes back to the transparency thing. Just changing the milestone to next 12 months doesn't cut it for me.
I believe in the technology, but have zero faith in management and their goons on the board. Like Blue has stated many times. Hopefully the technology overcomes management. 2017 was supposed to be our year right. Only ones that have been comoenated are employees and Board. Too bad for shareholders. That's what public companies are supposed to do right?
