That is a valid question. However, one would be fair minded in acknowledging that the share price depreciation over the last 2.5 years aligns with catastrophic science failure (which did not occur), not with a lack of quick enough science progress. The 94% drop from the 3 year high speaks for itself.
Now, on the other hand, there have certainly been some missteps on the management side. Introducing DUAL being a case in point, which may have given Astra a reason to hold off on a partnership, and the inability to monetize any constructs besides NEO. But the biggest reason for the drop was the relentless hedge fund manipulation, which continued even when the company had $165 million in cash right after the Amgen deal. So I don't know what would have prevented this manipulation other than perhaps 200-300 million upfront cash partnership deals (which are rare to come by) or a buyout. The fact that the shorts covered a significant volume below $2 proves the point that they do not really question the science. If they did, they have no reason to cover at any level until the company craters entirely. There are a gazillion small caps in this category.
I think many of us here analyzed this sufficiently enough to have come to the same conclusion. The only reasonable option for long term investors is to pick up shares at these levels (there may still be some time to do so), in order to cash some profits short term and avoid being caught flat footed like the last time. I still see a buyout in a year or so.
