Even though everyone has a right to their own opinion, I am glad many here are not the CEO, even though some seem to be armchair CEOs. Claiming cydy is not focused enough on HIV combo? They've done all they can do. They wait on the government entity now to know which results the FDA will accept(525/700)? Should they be resting on their laurels and twiddling their thumbs spending no money at all while other biotechs past them by? We need diversity, plans a, b and c. Less chance of all failing. In Nash, what does it hurt to do a few trials? If it comes out not so good, don't pursue any further, but to suggest not even trying? Oh cancer is too tough let's not try that one, too many pharma failures. When I have a project at work and I need directions from upper MGMT on how to proceed, I don't sit around staring at my inbox waiting for a reply. I create value for the company by working on other projects until I get what I need for the higher priority project. I see people say cydy sure issues a lot of press releases. More probably than most biotechs I know. Probably because most small biotechs have one maybe 2 indications and results of progress are further apart. Granted some PRs feel like fluff pieces but each one indicates progress being made for potentially more value. We all think differently, but sometimes the logic in the room baffles me. Maybe because I'm a programmer and my entire day is centered around logic. Happy investing! (PS I'm glad I'm not CEO either, all the jetsettng NP has to do and all the criticism he probably reads for any perceived or actual mistake...props to him. I prefer hiding in my cubicle and posting anonymously on message boards)
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
