Let me share a final thought. Despite all the doom and gloom prognostications permeating the various boards, INSM has an ace in the hole. Hypothetically speaking, let's assume the absolute worst case scenario looking out over the next few years. Injunction, loss on appeal(s) etc etc etc. INSM still has a portfolio of very valuable patents pertaining to iPlex (and outside of iPlex as well). Now despite Scarlett's consistent denunciation of INSM, INSM has conducted many clinical trials for a multitude of potential indications (some current, some not). The data to date has been very impressive. We know that Scarlett and Co can't make IGF-1 proficiently and they don't have the authority to produce BP3 (or know how). At the IGF levels necessary to combat SIR, HAR, MMD, Noonans etc, free IGF poses excessive health risks without the companionship of BP3. This is known, documented and simply awaiting the capital resources to exploit further (past current stages - yes, I expect positive results on the current clinical trials). INSM owning the brother to IGF's sister makes INSM worth many hundreds of millions today and much more down the road.
Let's just pretend INSM-18 doesn't exist. When Scarlett has the audacity to say that he has no interest in INSM or its product and continues to try to strong arm the Company, pinch yourself. He most certainly does want INSM's pipe rather than shutting the Company down. Fast track the pipe and the road to billions just got shorter. Shut INSM out and they get no shortcut (or ability to replicate). Which is why INSM has plenty of negotiating leverage in any "worst case scenario."
Injunction or no injunction, loss on appeals or not, INSM and its shareholders (new and old) will win this card game.
Jason
