I certainly hope you're right, a buyout at $10 a share certainly should get investor support, but if top line data is that good, I frankly wonder if we wouldn't be better off with a strong partnership, and remaining independent over the long term.
As I see it, short term the share price might only go to $2 to $5 on solid top line data and such a partnership, but that partner would bring in more than sufficient funds to bring Direct and other drugs through trials. In the long run, I believe that Direct could be far bigger than L as potentially it could be administered before surgery for many cancers, though it could take many years to gain approval for that.
It seems to me that the latest FDA actions are resulting in less future impact for approvals of drugs once they have initial approvals. What I'm suggesting is more and more off label use is not only permitted, but it's covered by insurance. Even initial approval isn't preventing people from using right to try to get drugs, in time and with adequate anecdotal proof, I believe insurance companies will pay, especially if they see the drug as potentially lowering their ultimate cost of treatment. I'm reminded of the pay me now, pay me later commercial for doing oil changes, you might go for years without one, but then you need a new engine.
I recently saw an acquaintance I hadn't seen in some time. I was surprised to hear about his health problems, as I gathered it, he had melanoma that spread all over, including the brain. He couldn't tell me precisely what experimental drugs he is on, but for now they're working, and so is he. In spite of the treatment, he's able to work most days. From what he said, it's not our drug, but he's being treated at UCLA, but not by our Dr. I meet people routinely at City of Hope that have similar stories, some who would have been dead for decades except for the actions taken to save them at COH.
Gary
