I realized it's hypothetical, but defending the company in this way, despite hypothetical, is absurd.
Don't think Linda is anyone close to a crook. As a matter of fact, my investment decision, unlike many others who dislike the fact that NWBIO has been run by two successful high-profile former lawyers, was initially made exactly because of that very fact, which suggested to me NWBIO might be run in a way of constant walking on the borderlines [timeline delayed, delayed, and delayed, kicking the can, carrot dangling, and you named it, which are all part of my understanding], but the outcome pursued thereafter would not be anything close to an instant rich/results for they are already rich, because the outcome has to be legendary if science is solid and continued to be proven solid.
Remember go big or go home! Only very successful persons like Linda and Les have such luxury to run a company "like playing a toy," not for instant results, not succumb to any unnecessary unwanted external pressure.
Only thing I have ever complained is Linda's greediness of awarding herself too many options/warrants at too low target prices. Even today, I still don't think Linda had no ways to cause a much higher historic lowest price, partly because she could make all up by rewarding herself more options/warrants at lower price, but for us retail investors we have had to put much much more hard-earned money to average down to make up, which is suck to say the least, although it's a trajectory I determined to follow.
After both UK and Germany were somewhat onboard which further validated the science, I finally decided to go big on my NWBO investment. Occasionally selling some, but always bought back and more. Now I (my family fund) is too deep in NWBO which has become my largest single stock holding ever, along with just a few other stocks in much much less significance.
IMHO, I have the trust that Linda would have let the public know if the trial's primary endpoint were a miss. For me that's the very basic of my belief; defending the company for whatever reason if the trial were a miss in the primary endpoint without a public announcement shows lack of trust in the company and absurd blindness.
Of course as I said repeatedly, it is a moot point to further discuss this hypothetical situation, because it's highly probably the trial is significant in meeting its primary endpoint.
Good luck to you!
