Bulls or investors have really little worries or care about this nonsense talks of shorts. There's going to be some serious covering by the "criminals " when the results come out. Then followed by a funding grant from BARDA or NIAID and/or outside licensing partnership with a pharma while simultaneously initiating PII and PIII trials here in the US and Europe. More positive data means more price appreciation. The TIH is going to foot the bill and a pharma deal would entail a cash upfront payment to IPIX, to go along with milestone payments and tiered % payments from future revenues plus a percentage of ownership of IPIX made by a pharma! That's a ton of upside value that will be created before worrying about stoking the fear of dilution when the three separate MTA's are footing the bill. Intentional? Maybe or maybe not.
So who really cares if the CEO sells shares using ATM @ , say, 75c, $1, $2,$3, or $4 per share? BARDA funding, Alphasigma milestone this July plus a potential exclusive licensing agreement? That's plenty of cash runaway to be even worrying about this dilution when you can just use ATM, wouldn't you agree? I wouldn't bet against the government who prints the money and is in desperate need of getting therapeutic and prophylaxis drugs out there. So is Roger being shortsighted?
If and when the trial is initiated, it a more likely that Bril will gain approval in the next four or five months. That's six years of timeline condensed into six months to get a repurposed drug approved! Scary, huh? So Roger is correct, why worry about the " criminals " spreading nonsense about this 300mil float?
Also, you didn't know that a company's valuation is tied into what drugs they have in the pipeline? Idle or not or commercialized? As for the comparators used by Roger, you should know that it's all relative and directly proportionate to those seven companies' assets and revenues vs Ipix. A ton of preclinical and late-stage companies have zero revenues but yet they have valuations. Why is that? It is because it's determined by their pipeline or assets and how soon that pipeline can generate revenues and become profitable using the discounted present value of future cash flows.
In this case, Bril being tested for therapeutic efficacy, dosing, cytotoxicity, and as an adjuvant or adjunct to a vaccine --all bring them VERY MUCH CLOSER to becoming profitable in repurposing Bril for CV19.
So to say that "there is no value whatsoever to comparing their floats to that of IPIX" is actually a false thing. Roger was referring to shares outstanding by naming seven companies as examples. Again, it's all relative and directly proportionate to their assets, pipeline, and revenues. Plenty of preclinical or late-stage bios with zero revenues with a value attached to their floats. Ipix is one of them. So I don't get the what is the fuss about the float?
Lastly, do you understand the difference between authorized shares vs outstanding shares vs float?? You seemed to be confused when you wrote the following paragraph below:
"As to the issue of the CEO taking advantage of the current trading, he's not. All of the share issuances for the last number of months have been as a result of the mfo exercising the rights their deal, made a year and a half ago and since amended in favor of the mfo, gave them. It's the mfo that has been "taking advantage of the current trading", not the CEO. It's their ball, so no one will be entitled to scream 'LACK of FIDUCIARY responsibility' anyway. If they do, they just don't understand the deal."