sdvi.... Cid. yes, they probably did try to receive a grant, but times have changed in the last 1-2 years, and maybe eligible for a Clinical Trial grant today? They seemed to fit the FDA requirements as they stand today, but RGBP might not be ready for some reason? They have a novel IP that covers a range of rare illnesses and diseases, so maybe another application has already been sent out?
I do not agree that KOOS is a bad CEO, but maybe his forte is the development of new Chemistries? I still have a Co' whose CEO doesn't know a da-- bit about managing, but is a genius at developing new tech products! His products carry an (AI) component to their products too, but he just doesn't have the fearlessness to market them at full capacity! At marketing, the guy is a total waste IMO.
He hired a Ceo who seems to be content with having a name plate on his desk, as the KNOTON and MORPHEUS products are sitting on a shelf, just waiting for obsolescence to set in!
If a Ceo isn't trying his best, then I would rate him low, but if he is doing his best considering the circumstances, I wouldn't be so harsh on him! Also, KOOS might have made mistakes, but in contrast to all that he has done, he still should be rated higher? In a few of my P-Stocks, I learned long ago, that the CEO didn't have many options for him to use, with all those options having no real advantage to the Company, only to those who have to supply the Company with some vital service! Yes, some of those less valuable decisions makes the Ceo look bad, but it is not the CEO's fault usually, but he is given too much blame instead of understanding! It is often succumbing to the lousy terms of the servicing Company, or "Bail-out?" Often, there seems to be too many negative options available to a Penny Company, which makes an already difficult task that much more difficult? I don't see how many survive the onslaught of problems? IMO
