Aren’t you really asking a different question?
Quantum, the underlying issue in your post is not really about being too small to have “recourse.” If Mgmt has misled investors regarding Bavi’s safety profile, this RB Board gives me plenty of recourse to hook up with other like investors to bring suit and share the costs, not to mention the institutional investors who would lead the charge. Shareholder litigation is rampant these days and more so because of chat boards like this one.
The real question underneath your post is not investor recourse, but the fear that perhaps management lacks integrity and accountability. What if SK doesn’t care about the accuracy of his PR and CC remarks? What if his professional reputation in the industry doesn’t mean anything to him and he just makes stuff up as he goes along? What if all the world-class docs who’ve joined the SAB have misjudged PPHM management?
My own assessment of these questions from years of close contact is that PPHM’s current management is an extremely conservative crowd. In fact they are so conservative and so gun shy that over and over they under-state and under-tell our story to the detriment of our pps.
So for me, when SK finally feels ready to make statements like: “We are VERY happy with the safety results,” that statement is all I need to hear on the APTT safety issue. Or when he says “we are INCREASINGLY ENTHUSIASTIC” about Bavi clinical results, that’s all I need to know the clinical trials are going well. I happen to know the Company lawyers scrub down every verb and adjective in statements like this before they go out. However, I understand why others with less contact might not give these statements the same weight I do.
If you want to get inside the heads of this management team, read the book “Built to Last.” It’s what these guys are all about. They know what they’re sitting on and they’re going to protect it by making sure all of their public remarks are very defensible.
