Cytodyn Inc (CYDY)

[BlackDoggie]

I think the answer to that is relatively easy. For (at least) as long as the company has had compelling HIV data, they’ve also had Pestell studying cancer implications. We didn’t know that... but they did. I wouldn’t have sold the company for HIV money then, not without knowing more about the cancer work. I think that in hindsight (for us), not dealing in the past may be a rational decision and a reasonable, even good, outcome. I also think that prior to the compelling HIV data, most BP assumed Pro 140 would fail along the way. See: vicriviroc.

Why not just sell/license HIV then? I still don’t have an answer to my question of how you manage that from a logistical standpoint, since it’s the same drug and delivery system for multiple indications. If I was a partner, I’d want the whole show or nothing. Otherwise you can’t regulate off label use, etc. And when you’re talking about the prospective market sizes that are being thrown around... you want to make sure you’re getting what you pay for.

At this point, I think they’re close enough (relatively speaking) to the cancer data that they won’t do anything until they have it, save maybe licensing the diagnostic test. They may have a prayer of licensing the whole enchilada for ex-US use, as well. Could give someone a deal to distribute in Japan, get the company some cash, and wait for the data to negotiate for real money in bigger markets. Unless there’s a handshake deal in place already - which I doubt - that’s the direction I’d be trying to take it. Nobody is going to give us non-dilutive financing without a partnership or licensing deal at this point, and I’ve laid out my reasons for that in previous posts.

Also, as is often the case, the entirety of this post was not necessarily a response to you or your single post to which I “responded”.