No offense, Flo, seriously, but we need to be VERY concerned with any flies in any of these promising ointments. MNTA is better than most when it comes to impressive achievements in the lab that add luster to future expectations, but arguably worse when it comes to the actual business of generating NPV from them. Only its big recent upswing has brought it to parity with a 5-year investment in the IBB index, and longer timeline comparisons honestly make me feel stupid(er). As Dew mentioned, he wound up doing well for reasons other than his original investing rationale, and I think you'll agree that there was a lot more thought and analysis that went into that than either of us generated. He was arguably something of a "cockeyed optimist" years ago and, well, we all know how the Copaxone business played out. We could have been looking at a much higher pps by now, but we got whomped by "possible" risks - many pointed out by JB - and we're lucky to be crawling out of that hole at least for the moment.
What I'm saying is that enthusiasm over "promising" developments is never a reason to disregard all the reasons we could get screwed. If you look at something on Amazon, don't you read the positive and negative reviews alike - and both with a critical eye as to how unbiased or knowledgeable the reviewers are? Same with this stuff where the stakes are much greater. I don't care if someone claims they have 2 cents or 2 million in MNTA - we need to be aware of every negative and "potential" downside in order to understand how much we're risking our money. Given the lack of any significant near-term cash flow, it's a time to be as nervous as hopeful.
